6 ms·

I'm not really sure what to say here. Both the parent commenter and the author of the article had issues with ChatGPT supplying illegal moves. Both methods resu

I'm not really sure what to say here. Both the parent commenter and the author of the article had issues with ChatGPT supplying illegal moves. Both methods resulted in this. It sort of doesn't matter how we're trying to establish that it's a 1400 level player, there's no defined correct way to do this. Regardless of method we've disproven it's a 1400 level player due to these illegal moves.

whimsicalism 4y ago
> Regardless of method we've disproven it's a 1400 level player due to these illegal moves. Explain your thought process here further if you don't mind.
- pattrn 4y ago
  I think his point is that 1400 level players don't make illegal moves, therefore ChatGPT is not playing at the level of a 1400 level player.
  - whimsicalism 4y ago
    Think blindfolded 1400 players, which is what this effectively is, would make illegal moves. But even if it doesn't play like human 1400 players, if it can get to a 1400 elo while resigning games it makes illegal moves on, that seems 1400 level to me. And i bet that some 1400s do occasionally make illegal moves (missing pins) while playing otb
    - throwwwaway69 4y ago
      This isn't really an apt metaphor. Firstly because higher level blindfolded players, when trained to play with a blindfold, also virtually never make mistakes. Secondly because a computer has permanent concrete state management (compared to humans) and can, without error, keep a perfect representation of a chess if it chooses to do so.
      - whimsicalism 4y ago
        1400 FIDE !=. high level blindfolded player.
  - DSMan195276 4y ago
    Personally I think the illegal moves are irreverent, the fact that it doesn't play exactly like a typical 1400 doesn't mean it can't have a 1400 rating. Rating is purely determined by wins and losses against opponents, it doesn't matter if you lose a game by checkmate, resignation, or playing an illegal move. That's not to say ChatGPT can play at 1400, just that that playing in an odd way doesn't determine its rating.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - throwwwaway69 4y ago
      This is like saying I play at a 2900 level if you just ignore all the times I lose.
      - vidarh 4y ago
        The article does not ignore the losses. In fact, it used a rule stricter than FIDE rules to trigger losses on illegal moves.
      - DSMan195276 4y ago
        No it's not, we're not ignoring losses or illegal moves at all, they are counted as losses and that's how you arrive at 1400. It's a (theoretically) 1400 player which plays significantly better then 1400 when it knows the lines, but makes bad or illegal moves when it doesn't, and that play averages out to be around your typical 1400 player. Functionally is just what a 1400 player already is, but with higher extremes and lower lows.
tedsanders 4y ago
The #1 misconception when working with large language models is thinking that a capability is a property of the model, rather than the model + input. It may be simultaneously true that ChatGPT has an elo of 100 when given a conversational message and an elo of 1400 when given an optimized message (e.g., strings that resemble chess games, with many examples present in the conversation). Understanding this concept is crucial for getting good results out of large language models.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

whimsicalism 4y ago

> Regardless of method we've disproven it's a 1400 level player due to these illegal moves. Explain your thought process here further if you don't mind.

pattrn 4y ago
I think his point is that 1400 level players don't make illegal moves, therefore ChatGPT is not playing at the level of a 1400 level player.
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  Think blindfolded 1400 players, which is what this effectively is, would make illegal moves. But even if it doesn't play like human 1400 players, if it can get to a 1400 elo while resigning games it makes illegal moves on, that seems 1400 level to me. And i bet that some 1400s do occasionally make illegal moves (missing pins) while playing otb
  - throwwwaway69 4y ago
    This isn't really an apt metaphor. Firstly because higher level blindfolded players, when trained to play with a blindfold, also virtually never make mistakes. Secondly because a computer has permanent concrete state management (compared to humans) and can, without error, keep a perfect representation of a chess if it chooses to do so.
    - whimsicalism 4y ago
      1400 FIDE !=. high level blindfolded player.
- DSMan195276 4y ago
  Personally I think the illegal moves are irreverent, the fact that it doesn't play exactly like a typical 1400 doesn't mean it can't have a 1400 rating. Rating is purely determined by wins and losses against opponents, it doesn't matter if you lose a game by checkmate, resignation, or playing an illegal move. That's not to say ChatGPT can play at 1400, just that that playing in an odd way doesn't determine its rating.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwwwaway69 4y ago
    This is like saying I play at a 2900 level if you just ignore all the times I lose.
    - vidarh 4y ago
      The article does not ignore the losses. In fact, it used a rule stricter than FIDE rules to trigger losses on illegal moves.
    - DSMan195276 4y ago
      No it's not, we're not ignoring losses or illegal moves at all, they are counted as losses and that's how you arrive at 1400. It's a (theoretically) 1400 player which plays significantly better then 1400 when it knows the lines, but makes bad or illegal moves when it doesn't, and that play averages out to be around your typical 1400 player. Functionally is just what a 1400 player already is, but with higher extremes and lower lows.

tedsanders 4y ago

The #1 misconception when working with large language models is thinking that a capability is a property of the model, rather than the model + input. It may be simultaneously true that ChatGPT has an elo of 100 when given a conversational message and an elo of 1400 when given an optimized message (e.g., strings that resemble chess games, with many examples present in the conversation). Understanding this concept is crucial for getting good results out of large language models.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]