IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2210.08289.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

AI-powered mechanisms as judges: Breaking ties in chess

Author

Listed:
  • Nejat Anbarci
  • Mehmet S. Ismail

Abstract

Recently, Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology use has been rising in sports to reach decisions of various complexity. At a relatively low complexity level, for example, major tennis tournaments replaced human line judges with Hawk-Eye Live technology to reduce staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. AI is now ready to move beyond such mundane tasks, however. A case in point and a perfect application ground is chess. To reduce the growing incidence of ties, many elite tournaments have resorted to fast chess tiebreakers. However, these tiebreakers significantly reduce the quality of games. To address this issue, we propose a novel AI-driven method for an objective tiebreaking mechanism. This method evaluates the quality of players' moves by comparing them to the optimal moves suggested by powerful chess engines. If there is a tie, the player with the higher quality measure wins the tiebreak. This approach not only enhances the fairness and integrity of the competition but also maintains the game's high standards. To show the effectiveness of our method, we apply it to a dataset comprising approximately 25,000 grandmaster moves from World Chess Championship matches spanning from 1910 to 2018, using Stockfish 16, a leading chess AI, for analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Nejat Anbarci & Mehmet S. Ismail, 2022. "AI-powered mechanisms as judges: Breaking ties in chess," Papers 2210.08289, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2210.08289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2210.08289
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jose Apesteguia & Ignacio Palacios-Huerta, 2010. "Psychological Pressure in Competitive Environments: Evidence from a Randomized Natural Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2548-2564, December.
    2. Anbarcı, Nejat & Sun, Ching-Jen & Ünver, M. Utku, 2021. "Designing practical and fair sequential team contests: The case of penalty shootouts," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 25-43.
    3. László Csató, 2017. "On the ranking of a Swiss system chess team tournament," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 254(1), pages 17-36, July.
    4. Cohen-Zada, Danny & Krumer, Alex & Shapir, Offer Moshe, 2018. "Testing the effect of serve order in tennis tiebreak," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 106-115.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel Goller, 2023. "Analysing a built-in advantage in asymmetric darts contests using causal machine learning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(1), pages 649-679, June.
    2. Ritxar Arlegi & Dinko Dimitrov, 2023. "League competitions and fairness," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Bar-Eli, Michael & Krumer, Alex & Morgulev, Elia, 2020. "Ask not what economics can do for sports - Ask what sports can do for economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    4. Krumer, Alex, 2020. "Pressure versus ability: Evidence from penalty shoot-outs between teams from different divisions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Brams, Steven & Ismail, Mehmet S. & Kilgour, Marc, 2023. "Fairer Shootouts in Soccer: The m-n Rule," MPRA Paper 116352, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Steven J. Brams & Mehmet S. Ismail, 2024. "Multi-Tier Tournaments: Matching and Scoring Players," Papers 2407.13845, arXiv.org.
    7. Arlegi, Ritxar & Dimitrov, Dinko, 2020. "Fair elimination-type competitions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(2), pages 528-535.
    8. Bucciol, Alessandro & Castagnetti, Alessandro, 2020. "Choking under pressure in archery," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    9. Anbarcı, Nejat & Sun, Ching-Jen & Ünver, M. Utku, 2021. "Designing practical and fair sequential team contests: The case of penalty shootouts," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 25-43.
    10. L'aszl'o Csat'o & D'ora Gr'eta Petr'oczy, 2020. "Fairness in penalty shootouts: Is it worth using dynamic sequences?," Papers 2004.09225, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    11. Karlsson, Niklas & Lunander, Anders, 2022. "The Strategic Jump - The Order Effect on Winning “The Final Three” in Long Jump Competitions," Working Papers 2022:8, Örebro University, School of Business.
    12. László Csató, 2021. "A comparison of penalty shootout designs in soccer," 4OR, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 183-198, June.
    13. Morgulev, Elia & Azar, Ofer H. & Galily, Yair & Bar-Eli, Michael, 2020. "The role of initial success in competition: An analysis of early lead effects in NBA overtimes," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    14. Bühren, Christoph & Kadriu, Valon, 2020. "The fairness of long and short ABBA-sequences: A basketball free-throw field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    15. Steven J. Brams & Mehmet S. Ismail & D. Marc Kilgour, 2023. "Fairer Shootouts in Soccer: The $m-n$ Rule," Papers 2303.04807, arXiv.org.
    16. Bühren, Christoph & Steinberg, Philip J., 2019. "The impact of psychological traits on performance in sequential tournaments: Evidence from a tennis field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 12-29.
    17. Christoph Buehren & Lisa Traeger, 2020. "The Impact of Psychological Pressure and Psychological Traits on Performance – Experimental Evidence of Penalties in Handball," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202043, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    18. Oscar Volij & Casilda Lasso de la Vega, 2016. "The Value Of A Draw In Quasi-Binary Matches," Working Papers 1601, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    19. Kocher, Martin G. & Lenz, Marc V. & Sutter, Matthias, 2010. "Psychological pressure in competitive environments: Evidence from a randomized natural experiment: Comment," Discussion Papers in Economics 11445, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    20. Xu, Minbo & Wang, Oliver, 2023. "Psychological pressure and performance in competitive environments: The first-hole effect in youth golf," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2210.08289. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.