It suggested better ones at 1300 ELO, but 1400-2600 ELO had this as the top move,
Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see how that'd be the top human move? There are also other positions it does this in, usually when it's losing by a lot. It's not always even on a losing position, it just makes a move that very clearly loses the piece, and there is no motive behind it, like it just loses that piece and gains absolutely nothing.
Maia 2 does this sometimes too, but on that position it gave actually realistic suggestions. And sure no matter what move you make in that position you're going to lose so doesn't reaeaally matter, but this is Maia 3 we are talking about, it's about human-likeness, and humans have perseverance, they wouldn't just give up like that, right?
I'm curious to learn why this happens, I guess the most realistic thing is to totally give up... I don't think so, humans would always take the chances that the opponent blunders, and not just give the rook as a charity donation. Maybe on these obviously losing positions most games ended short because of a resign, so the model tries to end it as quickly as it can to be "realistic", since it cannot resign. Perhaps below 1400 ELO people don't resign on situations like that on average, but above that players know better and just save time.
It suggested better ones at 1300 ELO, but 1400-2600 ELO had this as the top move,
Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see how that'd be the top human move? There are also other positions it does this in, usually when it's losing by a lot. It's not always even on a losing position, it just makes a move that very clearly loses the piece, and there is no motive behind it, like it just loses that piece and gains absolutely nothing.
Maia 2 does this sometimes too, but on that position it gave actually realistic suggestions. And sure no matter what move you make in that position you're going to lose so doesn't reaeaally matter, but this is Maia 3 we are talking about, it's about human-likeness, and humans have perseverance, they wouldn't just give up like that, right?
I'm curious to learn why this happens, I guess the most realistic thing is to totally give up... I don't think so, humans would always take the chances that the opponent blunders, and not just give the rook as a charity donation. Maybe on these obviously losing positions most games ended short because of a resign, so the model tries to end it as quickly as it can to be "realistic", since it cannot resign. Perhaps below 1400 ELO people don't resign on situations like that on average, but above that players know better and just save time.