Human-Centric vs. Engine-Based Chess Training: Comparative Study on Novice Player Progression

Abstract

Humans and chess engines exhibit significant disparities in play style, prompting many top players to adopt strategies similar to those of chess engines. However, when playing against humans, several confounding factors, such as how the players may not be particularly dependent solely on skill, but also psychology, and visible emotions, influence the game beyond mere skill. While chess engines consistently play the best moves, humans often rely on intuitive and practical moves that can create counter-play. Given the constraints and complexity of the board, it is more effective to teach beginners through a multi-month workshop focused on studying and learning about positional and human aspects of chess, exploiting the opponent's psychological state and time pressure. We conducted a study with 50 novice chess players, grouped by age, to test the effectiveness of these differing teaching methodologies. Our analysis indicates a significant increase in improvement with teaching using a human teaching methodology in comparison to teaching using a chess engine teaching methodology.