Chess AI

@Enlightenmania2022 said in #11:

Well, chess was more interesting before computers, in my opinion ...
So, If I were to choose a chess-time to play chess, it would be the before-pc time .... but as Hikaru says: it is what it is!
The fact that openings are almost a closed cased due to computers, is sad, in a way ....
But I wouldn't say AI destroyed chess though.

Not for everybody. I don't need stockfish, old fritz will do just fine for my level, and 99% is some kind of OFFLINE chess software for me, 1% vs humans.

Placchi a Symbolic Goal-Driven Interface @mauripoluthrona

Core Idea: Goal-Conditioned SAN (GC-SAN)
The +/- signs assign tactical intent, while the >/< signs assign strategic weighting.

In most current chess engines (Stockfish, Lc0, etc.) the interaction is engine-led. The human asks "What's the best move?" and the engine responds, usually ignoring human ideas or goals. It turns the player into a passive observer.

But what if we could flip that dynamic?

I'm proposing a simple symbolic command system, an extension of Standard Algebraic Notation (SAN), that lets humans guide the engine toward specific goals or plans. This would make the relationship collaborative, not submissive.

Symbol (GC-SAN) Meaning
... +e4 {Defend the square e4 maximize defenders.}
... -e4 {Attack the square e4 (maximize pressure.}
... +Nf3 {Protect the knight on f3.}
... -Nf3 {Attack or capture the knight on f3.}
... >e4 {Increase strategic priority of square e4.}
... <e4 {Decrease priority; allow freedom around the square.}

Instead of asking “What’s the best move?”, you could input: +e4 -Nc6 >d5 <g4

This would mean:
Strengthen control of e4
Target the knight on c6
Give strategic priority to d5
Allow freedom around g4 (don’t focus there)

The engine would then search conditioned on those goals, showing plans, moves, or branches aligned with the prompted idea. You’re not asking AI to solve the position for you; you’re asking it to help you explore your own plan.

This discussion is pointless till someone defines "AI". After which, more argument will ensue about the accuracy of the definition. :D

I tend to agree with ErzyaKS (post 2) that "AI" has already destroyed chess, but I would replace AI with "Computers". People are welcome to disagree, but if chess has been reduced to memorizing what some computer told you is best, I'd say with the original intent of the game of chess, by definition, it IS "destroyed".

I've shared my ideas, and I'm open to see projects that the community can build on. As for papers, I'm not entirely sure what's expected. That said, I hope this discussion stays focused on constructive brainstorming. There are already many posts, but few share actual ideas, papers, code, or project explanations.

As for the question that the OP asked: Will AI harm or elevate chess? I believe algorithms, tools, and code will elevate chess, just as online chess exists and the mechanical clock once did. Now I think even the sudden death clock setting needs to change. This isn't about agreeing or disagreeing; it's about helping each other move forward through shared insight.

AI, or any old 3600 engine will teach some old Dogs new tricks if they'd let it....

Forget about their unfair powers calculation & pruning, their concepts remain humanlike; Their tactics are above even the strongest GM, but they're still tactics
AI will keep proving the levels in Chess, and I'm glad they exist because it gives all levels of player a taste of the levels.

AI has completely changed the way we play and learn chess. Tools like Stockfish and AlphaZero have introduced new strategies that even the best players study today. It’s not just about machines beating humans anymore - it’s about helping players see the game in new ways. Coaches and players use AI every day to review games, spot mistakes, and find better moves. It gives instant feedback and makes high-level chess ideas easier to understand. Whether you're just starting out or already a strong player, AI has become a useful part of learning and improving. It’s clear that chess is growing, and AI is a big reason why.