Have a complete different experience. As a physical major, did a famous Millikan's oil drop experiment. Am a terrible experimentalist (went on to do my PhD in theoretical physics), so we got a charge of about 1/3 of the charge of an electron. Now, as I did not get a Nobel prize, I did not actually measure the charge of a single quark, but still got good enough grades for this study.

CommunicateD ?

Replying to your other questions: Its been a while since I played chess regularly (in a chess club), but:

Two bishops (of different colour) is actually not that difficult. There are some simple heuristics to help you there (an LLM might actually tell you these, haven’t asked;-0)

Bishop+Knight is, in my opinion slightly more complicated, there are some ‘tricks’ necessary to keep the king from running from one courner to the next.

Bishop+bishop is - in most situations - a draw (you need three knights to mate).

oh I didn't knew bishop + bishop is draw in most situations. Sorry mate!

Also I am not sure , I thought that we were playing as white , but are we playing as black ?

But there is a reasoning (see my reply above): winning is not possible (only the queen is strong enough against two bishops), so draw should be the goal. And underpromoting to knight is only way to keep the piece for another move while still promoting.

its actually surprising how many difficult puzzles can be solved by a very small look ahead and playing the only move that doesn't lose. i've even seen strong GM solve puzzles like this. this is especially useful when the first move in the puzzle is very clear but there might be 5 or 6 reasonable candidate moves in reply and its just a waste of time to compute each variation.

Winning is not possible: only the queen is strong enough to win against two bishops, and that fails to the check and loss of queen from black tiled bishop.

So draw is most one can get. Underpromoting to knight (with check, thus avoiding the check by the bishop) is the only way to promote and keep the piece another move.

I guess in this situation the knight against two bishops keeps the draw.

> I guess in this situation the knight against two bishops keeps the draw.

Yes, though - I think I can say without exaggeration - no human on earth can tell you exactly which positions the knight can hold out against the bishops for the required 50 moves.

So it's a strange problem: a perceptive beginner can find the right move through a process of elimination, but even a super-GM can't be certain it's good enough, or defend it accurately against a computer. I don't see anything about that that makes it a particularly good test of an LLM.

I didn’t even know you could pick which piece you want to promote to. But I’m also not an average chess player.

So the correct move is to move the Pawn up and promote to knight?

Thanks!

And: I think it is very difficult to gain weight by eating to many cucumbers ;-)

Cucumber is everywhere https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7arlFeaGX4U

:)

Well, winning with checkmate in just a few moves is also possible (d4 d5 - c4 dxc4 - e4 d8xd4 and after d1xd4, d4c4, c4xc7 and c7xc8 won by checkmate).

I guess playing 'good' chess is not the point, the point is that you can play at all using regexp. (The 'move a2a3 and lose as not considered legal' is more serious then it not actually playing well).

Yes. But the question remains: is there a geometrical analogue?

Yes, the /p is the problem (as the person above you stated).

This forum is run to inflate the value of certain startups. Nobody gives a shit. It’s basically a sponsored post.

Played the game (from 1M to 2.3M, a batting (?) average of 63.64%). Played big three times: one a big loss, twice a big win. Takeaway from the game: feels a bit like lottery (although I was relatively confident thrice, I was wrong one of those).