>We tested each Maia on 9 sets of 500,000 positions that arose in real human games, one for each rating level between 1100 and 1900. Every Maia made a prediction for every position, and we measured its resulting move-matching accuracy on each set.
>Each Maia captures human style at its targeted skill level. Lower Maias best predict moves played by lower-rated players, whereas higher Maias predict moves made by higher-rated players.
Previously on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25810034
However, assuming White has a 10% higher chance of winning in games between 2 Human players, that still leaves a decent margin of error for the White Human side to blunder during the game, so Black CPU wouldn't resign. This is assuming CPU doesn't know about that individual Human's blunder history.
Basically, CPUvCPU would definitely see an instant resign. In HUMvCPU, only the Human should definitely surrender as black. A Black CPU will keep playing in case the Human blunders.
Glancing at Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-move_advantage_in_ches...
This claim seems ahead of consensus? What evidence tells you that black is lost at move 1 rather than drawn?
Don't take this the wrong way, but how good are you, i.e. what is your rating?
imo, any reasonably seasoned player, after handicapping their opponent to be without a queen, should be able to easily win in a relatively straightforward by avoiding blunders and trading off pieces.
It's funny that it is relatively easy to beat stockfish when the computer has to play without the queen. But it is quite hard to beat a pro player even with such a strong handicap.
Still, the pro player has absolutely no chance against the engine without an handicap.
Assuming that stockfish runs on a computer that is much faster than what we have today and sees that white can always forcibly win, I wonder if stockfish would immediately resign as black playing against a human, even before the very first move.