The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman • Hacker News Board

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#361

Post by quadrifoliate » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:44 PM UTC

burnished wrote: post #311

quadrifoliate wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nobody saying that it's hopeless Well, it's a report about cheating which is essentially claiming that if you're not a GM by age 14, then you must be cheating . Which is...kind of the same thing.

It literally does not say that. What do you want them to do? Leave out all the weird or suspicious stuff so that some other commenter will swing by and complain that they didn't analyze it? The conclusion of their report is repeated several times; no evidence of OTB cheating.

> Leave out all the weird or suspicious stuff so that some other commenter will swing by and complain that they didn't analyze it?

I don't think any serious commenters are going to complain about the absence of stereotypes about "the greats" unbacked by statistical analysis. That is what is bad. The actual analysis of anomalously fast progress at equivalent ages is fine.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#362

Post by bombcar » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:45 PM UTC

maegul wrote: post #116

zeven7 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Using a computer engine is part of learning and preparing in chess (AFAICT). What other sport has a similar issue where an extremely useful and essential and highly available tool in the sport is considered cheating based entirely on using it within the narrow window of a game? In Magnus' recent interview with Lex Fridman, he said though members of his team utilize engines in preparation, it's not something he pers…

Thanks ... didn't listen to that interview. Also, I'm not a chess person, so everything is AFAICT. But ... 1) Magnus is one of the greatest ever, so he doesn't count as an example; 2) From excerpt, his *team* does use engines, and he *uses his team*. So his use of engines is one degree removed compared to others, which hardly matters, especially given point 1 above.

Yeah, I thing Magnus is saying he doesn’t practice by playing the computer because it doesn’t help; but his team can use the computer to try to find human situations for him to look at.

And it makes sense - if he’s the best he really doesn’t have someone better to play against to “learn” so finding plausible situations could be useful.

I wonder if that’s one of the things - he felt like he was playing a computer.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#363

Post by mellosouls » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:49 PM UTC

Orothrim wrote: post #354

mellosouls wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember the exact wording of his denial but I was thinking of him copping to two periods, which would cover 100+ games easily (any online regular can play more than that over a few days), so the report isn't a major surprise in that respect.

He specifically said "I never cheated in paid-tournament games" and "I never cheated whilst streaming". Chess.com presents pretty clear evidence that's untrue.

That's fine if so, but hardly worth 72 pages.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#364

Post by gbear605 » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:58 PM UTC

msbarnett wrote: post #59

gbear605 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn’t find any instances of cheating after August 2020. At that point his OTB ELO was only around 2450. It’s only after his last known instance of cheating that he improved into the truly great level.

> They didn’t find any instances of cheating after August 2020 They banned him after August 2020, and only reinstated him after a full confession the next year. The fact that, after having being caught red handed in online for-prize tournaments and knowing he’s being monitored very closely online going forward, he suddenly starts rising at a world-historic pace (at an age this has never before happened at) at OTB tou…

They reinstated him January of the following year, only five months later.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#365

Post by DiogenesKynikos » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 1:00 PM UTC

quadrifoliate wrote: post #134

lysp wrote: post #19

> The conventional wisdom is that if you are not a GM by age 14, it is unlikely that you can reach the top levels of chess. > While that statement may seem discouraging, it has been borne out in modern chess. > Greats like Fischer, Kasparov, Carlsen, and almost all of the modern GMs who have been established as top five players, were notable GMs by age 15 at the latest Wow.

In my opinion, this sort of ad-hoc stereotyping weakens the rest of the analysis. There are plenty of counterexamples. Anand, a former world champion, became a GM at age 19 and is still ranked World No. 9 currently (at age 52). Ding Liren (Current No. 2) became a GM at 17. Grischuk (currently No. 17, peak No.3) became a GM at 17. All three have crossed 2800 ELO at some point. I hope this is not the sort of analysis t…

Levon Aronian (former No. 2, current No. 10, achieved the 4th highest Elo rating of all time) only became a grandmaster at age 17.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#366

Post by dfreire » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 1:02 PM UTC

jsnell wrote: post #15

Releasing Exhibit C seems like a huge lapse in judgement from chess.com; they've supposedly redacted it, but there's so much information there that it has to be completely trivial to deanonymize. Like, just how many of the people with a 2700+ rating played in chess.com money tournaments until suddenly creating a new account in July 2020 and then didn't play in such tournaments for a year. If that still doesn't narrow…

I've not gone through it myself, but believing someone's investigation on Twitter, it does narrow it down to one person.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#367

Post by erwincoumans » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 1:05 PM UTC

eru wrote: post #284

socialismisok wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using computer vision on the video stream (eg via a capture card) and then sending valid mouse and keyboard inputs most definitely has not been around for decades. It's a mechanism to cheat that has zero binaries running on the host computer.

You could do statistical analysis on the mouse and keyboard inputs to try and detect this. (Very similar to how you might detect chess cheaters, actually.)

You can use (the data of) statistical analysis to train a deep neural network to avoid detection. That may also help avoiding chess detection cheaters, so the moves are not perfect anymore.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#368

Post by wantoncl » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 1:13 PM UTC

toast0 wrote: post #250

User23 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why I quit playing seriously when I was still an underclassman. It was overwhelmingly obvious that merely being well above average was completely irrelevant, and there was absolutely no practical reason for me to play chess whatsoever. Although it did subsequently get me laid once or twice, which in retrospect still surprises me.

> Although it did subsequently get me laid once or twice, which in retrospect still surprises me. !

I see what you did there. :)

You even managed a double-entendre in 2 completely different realms. Well done.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#369

Post by matwood » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 1:18 PM UTC

johannes1234321 wrote: post #309

jimmySixDOF wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just AI and e-sports either Fishermen Team Accused of Cheating by Stuffing Fish With Weights https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2022/10/01/fishermen-team-a...

This however is easily detectable. It is undetectable whether I have a second device showing me calculations of a different engine.

Depends. Some fish tournaments, like bass, are typically catch and release after weighing. This makes it harder to examine the fish if the goal is to release. Others like kingfish are catch and kill, though people cheat by other means like catching a fish earlier in the week.

The big money tournaments like bill fish, where millions of dollars can change hands, are usually catch and release on the spot but entrants have a judge on board to measure any fish caught.

I've done competitive king fishing in the past, and cheating or suspicion of cheating has been around for decades.

Re: The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

#370

Post by borbulon » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 1:19 PM UTC

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #329

erdevs wrote: post #27

This report provides a detailed background of Hans' potential cheating, and detailed breakdowns of certain aspects of chess.com's cheat-detection methodology, including previously unknown (or little known) methods such as window focus change event monitoring and post-focus-change move analysis.[1] The report also reveals Niemann's engine move correlations alongside over two dozen chess Grandmasters who have admitted…

> The fact that online cheating is so widespread even among top chess players is certainly news to many, including me. A few weeks ago my daughter very proudly announced that she managed to "outsmart" (=hack) her online test app used by her class. I was shocked and asked why she would do that, she's smart enough to get an A without that. She seemed obviously puzzled by my question and my lack of enthusiasm about her…

> A few weeks ago my daughter very proudly announced that she managed to "outsmart" (=hack) her online test app used by her class. I was shocked and asked why she would do that, she's smart enough to get an A without that. She seemed obviously puzzled by my question and my lack of enthusiasm about her "achievement" she was so proud of (it involved some JS modifications).

I wonder if maybe it was the chance to solve a different challenge than the one before her (the test), which if she could already get an A maybe wasn't the right challenge?