4 ms·

Yes, but it also completely invalidates the measurement of a 1400 elo rating. By comparison, any player making an illegal move is forfeiting the game, almost al

Yes, but it also completely invalidates the measurement of a 1400 elo rating. By comparison, any player making an illegal move is forfeiting the game, almost all people from ~300 elo can play without making illegal moves, chatgpt cant.

renewiltord 4y ago
The article: > So whenever it wanted to make an illegal move, it resigned. You: > By comparison, any player making an illegal move is forfeiting the game... By comparison indeed.
sebzim4500 4y ago
ChatGPT did forfeit whenever it made an illegal move, read the article.
- swatcoder 4y ago
  No, the writer arbitrarily decided to interpret illegal moves as resignations in order to support the conclusion they wanted. That's very different and grossly unscientific.
  - epups 4y ago
    This is not a scientific paper, and I at least find this decision justified, as he could have been more lenient and grab headlines with a bigger ELO.
  - mynameisvlad 4y ago
    I mean, that's more lenient than the official "interpretation" (rule) which is that your second illegal move results in a forfeit.
hgsgm 4y ago
All this above, and people are claiming that ChatGPT lacks human level comprehension of the text it consumes. In Chess.com, you absolutely can attempt an illegal move, and many players do, and you will not get punished for it, so chatgpt is better then a 1400 human player.
nsxwolf 4y ago
Why do illegal moves forfeit? In online play, they're validated. You can't make illegal moves. What's the ELO score if ChatGPT is corrected, and chooses a new move?
ncallaway 4y ago
> almost all people from ~300 elo can play without making illegal moves I don't believe you. Are you giving those people a restricted move set (i.e. computer chess, where it will _only_ allow legal moves)? Because if you give people an unrestricted board, I _guarantee_ you people will make lots of illegal moves. Me: Moves pawn Opponent: You can't do that, you exposed your king to check. Me: Oops, sorry, you're right.

renewiltord 4y ago

The article: > So whenever it wanted to make an illegal move, it resigned. You: > By comparison, any player making an illegal move is forfeiting the game... By comparison indeed.

sebzim4500 4y ago

ChatGPT did forfeit whenever it made an illegal move, read the article.

swatcoder 4y ago
No, the writer arbitrarily decided to interpret illegal moves as resignations in order to support the conclusion they wanted. That's very different and grossly unscientific.
- epups 4y ago
  This is not a scientific paper, and I at least find this decision justified, as he could have been more lenient and grab headlines with a bigger ELO.
- mynameisvlad 4y ago
  I mean, that's more lenient than the official "interpretation" (rule) which is that your second illegal move results in a forfeit.

hgsgm 4y ago

All this above, and people are claiming that ChatGPT lacks human level comprehension of the text it consumes. In Chess.com, you absolutely can attempt an illegal move, and many players do, and you will not get punished for it, so chatgpt is better then a 1400 human player.

nsxwolf 4y ago

Why do illegal moves forfeit? In online play, they're validated. You can't make illegal moves. What's the ELO score if ChatGPT is corrected, and chooses a new move?

ncallaway 4y ago

> almost all people from ~300 elo can play without making illegal moves I don't believe you. Are you giving those people a restricted move set (i.e. computer chess, where it will _only_ allow legal moves)? Because if you give people an unrestricted board, I _guarantee_ you people will make lots of illegal moves. Me: Moves pawn Opponent: You can't do that, you exposed your king to check. Me: Oops, sorry, you're right.