lichess.org
Donate

Science of Chess: What happens in the brain when we see the best move?

#11
@jamskahler said in #9:
> fMRI is actually really good for all of this - that's where you want to look

what are the other endpoints than metabloism or blow flow that fMRI can use with finer temporal resolution.

Also, I forgot to ask in previous installement of this seties where we saw brain imaging figures, whichi I thought were about fMRI (functional Magnetic resonance imaging, for those jumping in middel of thigns, like me):
Do we have rules of thumbs about the minimal pools of neuron and intensity of their metabolic activities that would provide for a visible signal in todays blood flow based fMRI. What is the noise level above which we get something localized.**

the article says range of 6+ seconds (i don,t see it right now) or more. not bad. but that would not do the job for the thinking using all sort of mind processes that might be categories as conscious or subconscious, it seems to me that as we acknolege more of the non-linguistic and non-concsious part of cognition, we might need to have more than one angle of measurement. And some time resolution or perhaps while still spatially informed not only high simply connected zones (although that might be scalablel notion, the answer about what we don't see in the figure that I am asking about, would likely be the knobs that would allow us to find if there are tasks that are multifocal (lack of words for what I am trying to express. function does not have to be using one focal point, connectivity does not mean that all connections are local, etc..). I am not talking from knowledge more from imagination from old knowledge.

And there is rarely a free lunch. or magic bullet. or as I said one big circuit to rule the all, although we can make such hypotheses they are transient in nature, till the next big thing. i digress. I think that EEG might be offering light in some blind spots of fMRI. but I still need to read the article here. (trying to kick myself by committing some opinioins and then not feeling like I am spamming in vain... will that work?).

**: noise in biology is something to study, it might even bring insight into the biology. (personal claim, from some very old exposure.... that reminds me of the "pin" in the author's occipital some blog ago, talk about chess being on authors mind).
#13
Maybe the test needs to be done by searching for an object. When we move our eyes over everything in our surroundings, nothing is really surprising. There is not aha the sun is our. Our search is more like looking at the clouds and trying to see patterns. So the excitement of finding something that someone else sees is not a aha feeling. It's more of an okay feeling, now I see it. So it's the same feeling for chess, found it. The emotion seems comes after the button is pressed, not before. It actual amplifies as the years goes by bragging about a move in a game or a puzzle that got many baffled.

When we search for something where only our eyes are looking, then maybe we need to see how the eyes react or the part of the brain where the eyes communicate with the brain.

When we type to an AI, the answer depends on how we expressed our selves:
Answer 1: www.perplexity.ai/search/science-of-chess-what-happens-6eMctWSPT8S1V_ETnB7jLg
Answer 2: www.perplexity.ai/search/forum-subject-science-of-chess-_QqLgHa0SVGZaebJZC5HOw#1

Even we can get different results by simply looking at a chess board from different directions. One player may look at the Queen first and another player may look at the king first. The end results may be the same and might not be. The inputs we get or give also affects our results.
#14
We do not know what the others are seeing, we know what we think we know so far. And the aha or eureka, is about find something new to our previous self before the experience. And it does not have to be after the move decision. It can be in minds eye, and the move is just a test of that aha, of the idea.

I guess there might also come a uhoh! after that, a rebound caused by reality if the mind,s aha did not pan out, but in the minds's eye theory of that aha-genic move/next future position idea (as it is not just the next move, it might be foreseeing as desirable future possibility, that the next move might be trying to get ot, not sure what was the chicken or egg in the foresight thinking.

lots happen before the move. I think chess was about that for a while. But time pressure and some kind of compteition with first person shooter video games, and thinking that in online slow games cheating might be more feasible, or that slow chess is already known and requires now too much knowledge to find such knowledge advantage to study with hopes that this will be a winning recipe.. I don't know but it seems there is a population shift or (slow) wave population hump of population toward fast chess. I might have been a bit caricatural there, I hope that is less confusing.

but even in slow chess.. it is only the moves done and recroded that are slow.

Maybe we should study the chess studying experience. It might over a less time compressed substracte to the experiemental methods. Perhaps asking the thinker to take some verbal notes of their thinking while being measured, for all that happens before the move is sent (sorry, hand-moved).

My initial point was, it precedes often the move. But that surprises can also happen from having tried one move.
That we only know what we know at the position under pondering, that chess is so rich that no one can claim to know what the others actually know (unless too much repertoire convergence in too big a population, but that might be an engine problem, not human). And that fast chess or wanting to weed factors of variation with limied time resolution (or as I said spatial resolution in the 3D brain space, which might be about processing events spatial resolution, that was previous confusing post), might suggest that make other chess board protocols than performance chess rigid and immutable packaging not to be the only way to combine neuroprobing tech. with various sorts of chess cognition tasks. Sorry my ideas come first the note-taking and sharing runs behind, and it makes of difficult sentences. But, not time or energy to keep looking backk as I barely am able to even do this. Take those notes and shared them as the thoughts come. So the whole set of them has a chance to be expressed. to make sense if it were readable. Verbal mind prison this is really.

one might even want to isolate knowledge factor by providing non realistic chess positoinjs.. for example.. and one might use lichess help in that taking notes of own thinking for a give position. we can make the extra transparency effort.

It might be creating some "artefacts" or interfering with the faster thinking that also happens in slow chess, but it sure would be more board information trace to combine with the brain probing.