lichess.org
Donate

Looking for 1600–2200 players for a 12-position chess decision-making test

LuxTuxedited

Hi,
I’m testing an early chess-training research prototype called EngineMind and I’m looking for players roughly in the 1600–2200 range.
It consists of 12 chess positions and takes approximately 15–20 minutes.
Unlike a normal tactics test, you don’t only choose your final move. For every position you can enter up to three candidate moves, then select the move you would actually play and indicate your confidence.
The goal is to study the player’s decision-making process, rather than simply measuring whether the engine’s first move was found.
Requirements:

  • complete the test in one sitting;
  • no engine or analysis board;
  • no outside assistance;
  • approximately 1600–2200 rating;
  • Chess.com, Lichess or FIDE rating is fine.
    Please treat the positions as real-game decisions rather than puzzles.
    Test link:
    https://enginemind-alpha.netlify.app
    The test is anonymous and requires no registration or email.
    At the end it generates a small .json response file. Please send me only that file after completing the assessment.
    After analysing the results, I’ll send participants a free preliminary profile highlighting possible strengths and recurring decision-making blind spots.
    This is currently an early research/alpha project.
    I’m initially looking for around 10–20 players.
    Thanks!

Small update: if you completed the assessment and your result was downloaded as a JSON file, you can submit it here:
https://enginemind-alpha.netlify.app/submit-result.html
Thanks again for helping with the alpha!

Hi, I’m testing an early chess-training research prototype called EngineMind and I’m looking for players roughly in the 1600–2200 range. It consists of 12 chess positions and takes approximately 15–20 minutes. Unlike a normal tactics test, you don’t only choose your final move. For every position you can enter up to three candidate moves, then select the move you would actually play and indicate your confidence. The goal is to study the player’s decision-making process, rather than simply measuring whether the engine’s first move was found. Requirements: - complete the test in one sitting; - no engine or analysis board; - no outside assistance; - approximately 1600–2200 rating; - Chess.com, Lichess or FIDE rating is fine. Please treat the positions as real-game decisions rather than puzzles. Test link: https://enginemind-alpha.netlify.app The test is anonymous and requires no registration or email. At the end it generates a small .json response file. Please send me only that file after completing the assessment. After analysing the results, I’ll send participants a free preliminary profile highlighting possible strengths and recurring decision-making blind spots. This is currently an early research/alpha project. I’m initially looking for around 10–20 players. Thanks! Small update: if you completed the assessment and your result was downloaded as a JSON file, you can submit it here: https://enginemind-alpha.netlify.app/submit-result.html Thanks again for helping with the alpha!
HommeSaoul

Hi, I sent it to the link.

But I don't remember giving any contact info so you won't be able to send a profile (I reflexively used an alias "hs" as the name).

Not a biggie tho but it would be nice if you guys could make a lichess blog with your results once done.

Good luck, I hope you find interesting connections!

Hi, I sent it to the link. But I don't remember giving any contact info so you won't be able to send a profile (I reflexively used an alias "hs" as the name). Not a biggie tho but it would be nice if you guys could make a lichess blog with your results once done. Good luck, I hope you find interesting connections!
<Comment deleted by user>
LuxTux

Hi, thanks a lot — I did receive your submission under HS, so everything worked.
And thank you, genuinely, for taking the test seriously. The same goes for everyone who is participating: the amount of time and thought people are putting into the positions is extremely valuable for this early validation.
We deliberately didn't ask for an email or any identifying information because we wanted the test to stay as anonymous as possible. Since you've posted here, though, if you'd like I can send you your preliminary profile here on Lichess once we've analysed the first batch.
Your suggestion about a Lichess blog is a very good one. Once we have enough responses, I'd like to publish an aggregated write-up explaining the methodology, what patterns we found, what didn't work, and how much of the idea actually survives contact with real players.
I won't give away the specific categories or engine comparisons publicly yet, because that could influence people who haven't taken the test.
But I can already say one thing: your submission was useful because the candidate moves you considered told us something that the final move alone would not have shown. That's exactly one of the things we're trying to test with EngineMind.
Once we have a slightly larger sample, I'll be happy to share more detail.
Thanks again for helping with this.

Hi, thanks a lot — I did receive your submission under HS, so everything worked. And thank you, genuinely, for taking the test seriously. The same goes for everyone who is participating: the amount of time and thought people are putting into the positions is extremely valuable for this early validation. We deliberately didn't ask for an email or any identifying information because we wanted the test to stay as anonymous as possible. Since you've posted here, though, if you'd like I can send you your preliminary profile here on Lichess once we've analysed the first batch. Your suggestion about a Lichess blog is a very good one. Once we have enough responses, I'd like to publish an aggregated write-up explaining the methodology, what patterns we found, what didn't work, and how much of the idea actually survives contact with real players. I won't give away the specific categories or engine comparisons publicly yet, because that could influence people who haven't taken the test. But I can already say one thing: **your submission was useful because the candidate moves you considered told us something that the final move alone would not have shown**. That's exactly one of the things we're trying to test with EngineMind. Once we have a slightly larger sample, I'll be happy to share more detail. Thanks again for helping with this.
fallboss007

I'm 1400 but I think I'm definitely better than this I don't play a lot if you want I can test it

I'm 1400 but I think I'm definitely better than this I don't play a lot if you want I can test it
LuxTux

Thanks! Yes, you can still take it if you’d like.
For the main validation sample I’m currently focusing on stronger players, so your result would probably be treated as exploratory/out-of-range data rather than part of the core 1600–2200 sample.
But it can still be useful, especially if you take the test seriously and complete it under the same conditions as everyone else.
If you want, feel free to try it:
https://enginemind-alpha.netlify.app
Please use your actual current rating and platform in the form, rather than estimating what you think your strength might be

Thanks! Yes, you can still take it if you’d like. For the main validation sample I’m currently focusing on stronger players, so your result would probably be treated as exploratory/out-of-range data rather than part of the core 1600–2200 sample. But it can still be useful, especially if you take the test seriously and complete it under the same conditions as everyone else. If you want, feel free to try it: https://enginemind-alpha.netlify.app Please use your actual current rating and platform in the form, rather than estimating what you think your strength might be
LuxTux

Quick update: we now have the first completed assessments and the early results are already showing something interesting: players of similar strength can arrive at mistakes for very different reasons — sometimes the critical move is never considered, while in other cases it is considered and then rejected.
I’m still looking for about 7 more Lichess players around 1800–2400 Rapid for the first alpha batch.
The test takes around 15–25 minutes, is anonymous, and results are now submitted automatically at the end.
https://enginemind-alpha.netlify.app
Thanks again to everyone who has already participated — people have clearly been taking the positions seriously, which is extremely helpful.

**Quick update**: we now have the first completed assessments and the early results are already showing something interesting: players of similar strength can arrive at mistakes for very different reasons — sometimes the critical move is never considered, while in other cases it is considered and then rejected. I’m still looking for about **7 more Lichess players around 1800–2400 Rapid** for the first alpha batch. The test takes around 15–25 minutes, is anonymous, and results are now submitted automatically at the end. https://enginemind-alpha.netlify.app Thanks again to everyone who has already participated — people have clearly been taking the positions seriously, which is extremely helpful.
<Comment deleted by user>
Anon1mouse

@LuxTux said ^

After analysing the results, I’ll send participants a free preliminary profile highlighting possible strengths and recurring decision-making blind spots.

Hi! I just did the test, but how do you send the results if you keep it anonymous? also I felt like I considered more than three moves for some and for others I had no idea what to do so I did something kinda random.

@LuxTux said [^](/forum/redirect/post/5IIK4eqT) > After analysing the results, I’ll send participants a free preliminary profile highlighting possible strengths and recurring decision-making blind spots. Hi! I just did the test, but how do you send the results if you keep it anonymous? also I felt like I considered more than three moves for some and for others I had no idea what to do so I did something kinda random.