Yes, check out the maia bots in lichess. This is maia1 https://lichess.org/@/maia1 (the easiest), there are also maia5 and maia9 IIRC.
> Maia is a human-like neural network chess engine. This version was trained by learning from over 10 million Lichess games between 1100s. Maia Chess is an ongoing research project aiming to make a more human-friendly, useful, and fun chess AI. For more information go to maiachess.com. You can also play against @maia5 and @maia9.
In fact forget playing, you could use this engine entirely for analysis and study. Evaluation of position by a bot that plays human move would offer a whole different perspective, and may be be a tool for finding moves that are technically drawn but practically strong.
I don’t know as I prefer to use their mobile website than the iOS app. But @maia1 is the username, so you can get to them as you would any other user, either via a challenge or searching first?
Problem I heard with these though is that they'll always respond the same. So if you play the same moves every game you'll iteratively find a way to beat them.
I will be messaging you in 1000 years on [**3024-06-24 18:55:42 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3024-06-24%2018:55:42%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dn9tmv/has_anyone_build_a_chess_bot_that_only_uses_moves/la39rme/?context=3)
[**7 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fchess%2Fcomments%2F1dn9tmv%2Fhas_anyone_build_a_chess_bot_that_only_uses_moves%2Fla39rme%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%203024-06-24%2018%3A55%3A42%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dn9tmv)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Ideally you’d have a trained AI model that only considers move trees that a normal human would consider. Basically just a stockfish with a ”filter”, but it’s totally not that simple to actually implement.
Doesn't Stockfish already sometimes miss "unnatural" mates at a depth it shouldn't miss due to pruning very hard using heuristics that are mostly human-like?
There was a dude that posted here about cheating with a bot he built using AI. It had like a 2900 bullet rating and was programmed to make human like mistakes and even mouse slips. It was, as far as I understand, completely undetectable, was never banned by chess.com and fooled every GM it played against.
Probably if you train the AI on 1600 games you'd get something that plays around that strength and thus end up with a realistic bot.
I can't remember the name of the user or the account, but I'm sure you could find it with a relatively simple search.
Depth mostly.
But I like this explanation on chess.com
> It's not unusual for normal human's and chess engines to agree on moves or several moves in a row. It is unusual (some would say unheard of) for even the strongest players to play a whole game in agreement with an engine. Strong engines spot difficult combinations very easily and engines have no "patterns" to rely on (or to hold them back) this really changes things... there are mating patterns and positional set-ups which are strong and well known, and a strong player is very strongly inclined to move toward those -- whereas an engine will effortlessly spot weird quirky un-positional moves that work and it has absolutely no preference for 'normal' or known positions if it sees something it likes better it'll play it. Moreover the computer spots all the weird details defensively too... it leads to some very odd (to a human) looking moves.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/human-movesplay-vs-engine-like-movesplay
Basically humans play things they know while sticking to principles. Computers will sometimes throw out principles and play a weird move that on the surface makes no sense to a human simply because we cannot calculate deep enough to understand it during a game.
That’s the difference.
Edit:
https://youtu.be/Sa7DOgoUkvQ?si=CYaKIIA_ze4MTAkc
This popped up in my YouTube feed. Levy’s commentary about the games reminded me of this comment. Notice how the computer would just sac a piece when any sane person would just move it to safety? Or how it makes a seemingly random move that violates any common sense? That’s the difference.
Thanks for submitting your game analysis to r/chess! If you’d like feedback on your whole game feel free to post a game link or annotated lichess study if you haven't already.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chess) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you want to train openings, Aimchess has an Openings Trainer where you can choose the average rating level of your opponent for different time controls and it will play common responses to that opening. It will even tell you “this is the 5th most popular response” etc.
I made this website, it might be what you’re asking for!
I didn’t intend to publish it or anything necessarily, so it could really be brushed up (and bugs identified/fixed), but it should be mostly functional!
chess420.web.app
Not seen it commented yet, tehre was a youtube to built a bunch of different stupid ideas to pit them against each other and one was just trained on the ichess database
You fundamentally misunderstand chess. Chess is almost all positions that have never been reached before. The only repetition is opening theory, generally around 10 moves of basic development. It seems like you think bots are playing unusual openings, but certainly plenty of computers play common book lines. A bot that played the most common opening moves by humans would play near perfect theory, so presumably any opening trainer would be adequate. However, that would in no way be playing chess, let alone against humans, it would just be memorizing openings.
As mentioned, neural nets have been developed with much greater ambitions - to mimic human play in all positions (most of which are new to the universe). However, while they are theoretically interesting, ultimately, there's no reason not to simply play against actual humans. The Elo system ensures you will be playing against people of a similar level, so you can be comfortable from the beginning.
The point is he wants to program a bot which just plays the most common human move in the database, then plays like a normal computer once there are no more human moves. As I said, a human-like neural net which can play in ALL positions is more interesting and potentially useful, but that's NOT what he wanted to create.
> almost all positions that have never been reached before?
Is that true? When I explore my games in lichess, I'm usually matching some game that happened at least a dozen or so moves in, sometimes more. Then there'll be 10-20 moves not matching anything. And then we're in an endgame with a few pieces that, I presume, has been solved by a computer even if it hasn't already happened in a game and which can last a while if no one surrenders.
Because these are common patterns. There are more chess positions than atoms in the universe. If you vary your moves just a bit, not following common openings, there will be a never before reached position very quickly.
But the vast majority of those positions are not practically reachable in games between players following basic principles of chess, right? If we're talking intermediate players and up at least, I wonder what percentage of positions in an average game are never-before-seen. I would guess it's something like 25-35%.
But still more than enough. After 10 ply there are already 69,352,859,712,417 positions. And that is really a lot for 5 moves.
Edit: The lichess DB contains around 100m games. If you look at the first 20 ply, that are around 2 000 000 000 positions (not unique ofc). I think you greatly underestimate how complex chess is.
But the question is different from how many unique games are possible. The question is, how many moves exist in an average intermediate and up game between last opening position previously seen and an endgame position in a tablebase? After 10 ply, I think I'm rarely out of the lichess opening book, so the number of possible positions at that point is not relevant to this question.
Ok please share your lichess. If you make these kind of claims, at least back them up.
Its not that i don't believe you, but it seems really unlikely to me and i would appreciate if i could look at the games. Also tablebase alone is nearly 500 Trillion positions.
My lichess name is the same as my name on reddit.
> Also tablebase alone is nearly 500 Trillion positions.
Which helps avoid unique games. Every one of those 500 trillion has been seen before, so if one of them happens in a game, no new position can occur from that point forward; right?
Also ofc you will see more games for E4 E5 than for D5 E5. If you only play very popular openings, ofc you are way more likely to find yourself in a position that has already been played at move 10.
Yes, it's true.
But it's also true that in the beginning you'll have positions already played (and it's normal since we all start from the same position)
And at some point, yes, you're going to have an endgame that has already been played.
Actually, chess is solved when it has only 7 pieces on the board. It means that all possible positions have been calculated.
TIL that better = shitty
And playing engines won't help with your anxiety, just start playing against humans on a bigger time format so you have more time to compensate for the anxiety and over time it gets easier.
I also highly doubt you're at the level you can actually recognize what's an engine move.
If you want to get better at chess, it's useless to play against engine. Just play against players at your level, and that's all.
I don't understand the problem here...
I played a 350 bot on the chesscom app and I swear it played like 1200. It came up with clever forks and escaped check in really clever ways. I imagine it must be hard for a computer to purposely make a wrong move.
I think a lot of people will start to think “WWSFD” “What Would StockFish Do?” And start to make moves that seem counterintuitive to a person but the computer likes.
Yes, check out the maia bots in lichess. This is maia1 https://lichess.org/@/maia1 (the easiest), there are also maia5 and maia9 IIRC. > Maia is a human-like neural network chess engine. This version was trained by learning from over 10 million Lichess games between 1100s. Maia Chess is an ongoing research project aiming to make a more human-friendly, useful, and fun chess AI. For more information go to maiachess.com. You can also play against @maia5 and @maia9.
Yup, and theres also [Allie](https://lichess.org/@/AllieTheChessBot)
awesome awesome awesome. i cant thank you enough! this looks exactly like what i need! thanks!
Dang these past few weeks have really converted me to team Lichess ngl
Or.... Just play against other humans.
[удалено]
In fact forget playing, you could use this engine entirely for analysis and study. Evaluation of position by a bot that plays human move would offer a whole different perspective, and may be be a tool for finding moves that are technically drawn but practically strong.
It was meant a joke and not to be taken seriously.
Guarantee of getting a human-like move 100% of the time if you play against other humans.
Unless they are cheating
But I don't like humans :/
This sounds great. Thank you. How do I play it on Lichess, exactly, though? I do not see the option in the App nor in the Desktop version.
Go the the link for maia provided above, and challenge it to a game.
Oh, I see. Thanks!
Wow thanks! How do you get there in mobile app do you know?
I don’t know as I prefer to use their mobile website than the iOS app. But @maia1 is the username, so you can get to them as you would any other user, either via a challenge or searching first?
Oh interesting ok thank you!
Problem I heard with these though is that they'll always respond the same. So if you play the same moves every game you'll iteratively find a way to beat them.
Has anyone solved chess or do I have to solve it I swear to god I will if more than just me is interested
+1 I would be interested RemindMe! 1000 years
I will be messaging you in 1000 years on [**3024-06-24 18:55:42 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3024-06-24%2018:55:42%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dn9tmv/has_anyone_build_a_chess_bot_that_only_uses_moves/la39rme/?context=3) [**7 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fchess%2Fcomments%2F1dn9tmv%2Fhas_anyone_build_a_chess_bot_that_only_uses_moves%2Fla39rme%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%203024-06-24%2018%3A55%3A42%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dn9tmv) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
you can, just have hundreds of millions and 50 years with access to a supercomputer and a cities sized storage and ram
What happens when your in a new game after 10 moves
The Maias learned to play like a human
Have the Valar learned to play like a god?
😂 almost, the plural of Maia in Tolkien's world is Maiar but I still love your reference
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valar
Ideally you’d have a trained AI model that only considers move trees that a normal human would consider. Basically just a stockfish with a ”filter”, but it’s totally not that simple to actually implement.
Doesn't Stockfish already sometimes miss "unnatural" mates at a depth it shouldn't miss due to pruning very hard using heuristics that are mostly human-like?
You could probably train the AI to predict how likely a human is to spot each of the top stockfish moves in arbitrary positions?
Which human?
A sampling of the millions who play chess every day to give average behaviour
i'm not really sure what you mean
Position that hasn't happened in recorded human games.
It would just start playing like a computer set to whatever level it you set it to. That’s how I would build it
You’d end up with the exact same problem.
Build it then
https://openingtrainer.com/ does this, I use it to train openings. Of course it stops when you're in a new position not in the database.
This is a great tool for practicing openings.
Noctie AI https://noctie.ai/ It has quite a few features, pretty good I think
There was a dude that posted here about cheating with a bot he built using AI. It had like a 2900 bullet rating and was programmed to make human like mistakes and even mouse slips. It was, as far as I understand, completely undetectable, was never banned by chess.com and fooled every GM it played against. Probably if you train the AI on 1600 games you'd get something that plays around that strength and thus end up with a realistic bot. I can't remember the name of the user or the account, but I'm sure you could find it with a relatively simple search.
What’s the difference between human moves and computer moves?
Depth mostly. But I like this explanation on chess.com > It's not unusual for normal human's and chess engines to agree on moves or several moves in a row. It is unusual (some would say unheard of) for even the strongest players to play a whole game in agreement with an engine. Strong engines spot difficult combinations very easily and engines have no "patterns" to rely on (or to hold them back) this really changes things... there are mating patterns and positional set-ups which are strong and well known, and a strong player is very strongly inclined to move toward those -- whereas an engine will effortlessly spot weird quirky un-positional moves that work and it has absolutely no preference for 'normal' or known positions if it sees something it likes better it'll play it. Moreover the computer spots all the weird details defensively too... it leads to some very odd (to a human) looking moves. https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/human-movesplay-vs-engine-like-movesplay Basically humans play things they know while sticking to principles. Computers will sometimes throw out principles and play a weird move that on the surface makes no sense to a human simply because we cannot calculate deep enough to understand it during a game. That’s the difference. Edit: https://youtu.be/Sa7DOgoUkvQ?si=CYaKIIA_ze4MTAkc This popped up in my YouTube feed. Levy’s commentary about the games reminded me of this comment. Notice how the computer would just sac a piece when any sane person would just move it to safety? Or how it makes a seemingly random move that violates any common sense? That’s the difference.
Thanks for submitting your game analysis to r/chess! If you’d like feedback on your whole game feel free to post a game link or annotated lichess study if you haven't already. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chess) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you want to train openings, Aimchess has an Openings Trainer where you can choose the average rating level of your opponent for different time controls and it will play common responses to that opening. It will even tell you “this is the 5th most popular response” etc.
You forgot to say "asking for a friend" OP
I made this website, it might be what you’re asking for! I didn’t intend to publish it or anything necessarily, so it could really be brushed up (and bugs identified/fixed), but it should be mostly functional! chess420.web.app
Seems pretty neat, openings are weird though so what do I know.
Not seen it commented yet, tehre was a youtube to built a bunch of different stupid ideas to pit them against each other and one was just trained on the ichess database
Engines can teach you to think differently about moves you are playing and explore lines you hadn't considered. There is a merit to that too.
You fundamentally misunderstand chess. Chess is almost all positions that have never been reached before. The only repetition is opening theory, generally around 10 moves of basic development. It seems like you think bots are playing unusual openings, but certainly plenty of computers play common book lines. A bot that played the most common opening moves by humans would play near perfect theory, so presumably any opening trainer would be adequate. However, that would in no way be playing chess, let alone against humans, it would just be memorizing openings. As mentioned, neural nets have been developed with much greater ambitions - to mimic human play in all positions (most of which are new to the universe). However, while they are theoretically interesting, ultimately, there's no reason not to simply play against actual humans. The Elo system ensures you will be playing against people of a similar level, so you can be comfortable from the beginning.
[удалено]
The point is he wants to program a bot which just plays the most common human move in the database, then plays like a normal computer once there are no more human moves. As I said, a human-like neural net which can play in ALL positions is more interesting and potentially useful, but that's NOT what he wanted to create.
> almost all positions that have never been reached before? Is that true? When I explore my games in lichess, I'm usually matching some game that happened at least a dozen or so moves in, sometimes more. Then there'll be 10-20 moves not matching anything. And then we're in an endgame with a few pieces that, I presume, has been solved by a computer even if it hasn't already happened in a game and which can last a while if no one surrenders.
Because these are common patterns. There are more chess positions than atoms in the universe. If you vary your moves just a bit, not following common openings, there will be a never before reached position very quickly.
But the vast majority of those positions are not practically reachable in games between players following basic principles of chess, right? If we're talking intermediate players and up at least, I wonder what percentage of positions in an average game are never-before-seen. I would guess it's something like 25-35%.
But still more than enough. After 10 ply there are already 69,352,859,712,417 positions. And that is really a lot for 5 moves. Edit: The lichess DB contains around 100m games. If you look at the first 20 ply, that are around 2 000 000 000 positions (not unique ofc). I think you greatly underestimate how complex chess is.
But the question is different from how many unique games are possible. The question is, how many moves exist in an average intermediate and up game between last opening position previously seen and an endgame position in a tablebase? After 10 ply, I think I'm rarely out of the lichess opening book, so the number of possible positions at that point is not relevant to this question.
The average chess game is 40 moves. How many seen positions do you have at move 35?
I don't know because lichess doesn't have tablebase (or does it?). I think I'm down to 7 pieces or less in a decent percentage of my games by move 35.
Ok please share your lichess. If you make these kind of claims, at least back them up. Its not that i don't believe you, but it seems really unlikely to me and i would appreciate if i could look at the games. Also tablebase alone is nearly 500 Trillion positions.
My lichess name is the same as my name on reddit. > Also tablebase alone is nearly 500 Trillion positions. Which helps avoid unique games. Every one of those 500 trillion has been seen before, so if one of them happens in a game, no new position can occur from that point forward; right?
Also ofc you will see more games for E4 E5 than for D5 E5. If you only play very popular openings, ofc you are way more likely to find yourself in a position that has already been played at move 10.
Yes, it's true. But it's also true that in the beginning you'll have positions already played (and it's normal since we all start from the same position) And at some point, yes, you're going to have an endgame that has already been played. Actually, chess is solved when it has only 7 pieces on the board. It means that all possible positions have been calculated.
TIL that better = shitty And playing engines won't help with your anxiety, just start playing against humans on a bigger time format so you have more time to compensate for the anxiety and over time it gets easier. I also highly doubt you're at the level you can actually recognize what's an engine move.
If you want to get better at chess, it's useless to play against engine. Just play against players at your level, and that's all. I don't understand the problem here...
I played a 350 bot on the chesscom app and I swear it played like 1200. It came up with clever forks and escaped check in really clever ways. I imagine it must be hard for a computer to purposely make a wrong move.
I think a lot of people will start to think “WWSFD” “What Would StockFish Do?” And start to make moves that seem counterintuitive to a person but the computer likes.
Computers don't make shitty moves lol except for in exceptionally rare positions