Stuff AI CAN'T Do

¿Puede la IA vencer a los mejores jugadores profesionales de Stratego ?

¿Qué opinas?

DeepMind's DeepNash derrotó a humanos expertos en Stratego — un juego con información imperfecta que había resistido enfoques anteriores.

Background

Current AI systems have made significant progress in playing Stratego, a complex board game that requires strategic thinking and planning. However, beating top professional Stratego players is still a challenging task, as the game involves a high degree of uncertainty and unpredictability. While AI has been able to defeat human opponents in other strategy games like chess and Go, Stratego's unique characteristics, such as the presence of hidden pieces and limited information, make it more difficult for AI to dominate. As a result, top professional Stratego players can still outmaneuver AI systems in many situations. IEEE Spectrum — Enriched May 9, 2026.

Estado verificado por última vez en July 3, 2026.

📰

Galería

In the Court of AI Capability
Summary of Findings
Verdict over time
May 2026May 2026May 2026May 2026May 2026May 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026Jul 2026
Sitting at the Bench Filed · jul. 3, 2026
— The Question Before the Court —

¿Puede la IA vencer a los mejores jugadores profesionales de Stratego?

★ The Court Finds ★
Reaffirmed
Casi

Existen demostraciones limitadas — pero el panel no fue unánime.

Ruling of the Bench

After thorough deliberation, the jury found that while DeepNash ascended to the upper echelons of Stratego play, it has not yet claimed the absolute summit of human mastery; the evidence shows it can dominate most players but still stumbles against a select few elite tacticians. The panel, though unanimous in its hesitation, noted with admiration that the AI had already surpassed human benchmarks in related strategy games and continues to close the gap with every iteration. The ruling: DeepNash plays like a grandmaster in training, but not yet crowned.

— Hon. J. von Neumann III, Presiding
Jury Tally
0
2Casi
0No
Verdict Confidence
88%
The Court of AI Capability is, of course, not a real court.
But the data is real.
The Case File · Stacked History
Session I · May 2026 No
Session II · May 2026 No
Session III · May 2026 Casi · 85%
Session IV · May 2026 Casi · 80%
Session V · May 2026 Casi · 80%
Session VI · May 2026 Casi · 79%
Session VII · Jun 2026 Casi · 75%
Session VIII · Jun 2026 Casi · 81%
Session IX · Jun 2026 Casi · 85%
Session X · Jun 2026 In_research · 88%
Session XI · Jun 2026 Casi · 89%
Case № A6CA · Session XII
In the Court of AI Capability

The Case File

Docket № A6CA · Session XII · Vol. XII
I. Particulars of the Case
Question put to the court¿Puede la IA vencer a los mejores jugadores profesionales de Stratego?
SessionXII (12 hearing)
Convened3 jul. 2026
Previously ruledNO (May '26) → NO (May '26) → ALMOST (May '26) → ALMOST (May '26) → ALMOST (May '26) → ALMOST (May '26) → ALMOST (Jun '26) → ALMOST (Jun '26) → ALMOST (Jun '26) → IN_RESEARCH (Jun '26) → ALMOST (Jun '26) → ALMOST (Jul '26)
Presiding JudgeHon. J. von Neumann III
II. Cumulative Tally Across Sessions

Across 12 sessions, 36 jurors have heard this case. Combined tally: 7 YES · 22 ALMOST · 7 NO · 0 IN RESEARCH.

Note: cumulative includes older juror opinions. The current session tally above is the live verdict.

III. Verdict

By a vote of 0 — 2 — 0, the panel returns a verdict of CASI, with verdict confidence of 88%. The court so orders.

IV. Declaraciones del tribunal
Jurado I ALMOST

"AI (DeepNash) has demonstrated strong performance in Stratego but not definitively superior to all top humans"

Jurado II ALMOST

"AI excels in similar games like Chess"

Las declaraciones individuales de los jurados se muestran en su inglés original para preservar la precisión probatoria.

J. von Neumann III
Presiding Judge
M. Lovelace
Clerk of the Court

Lo que el público piensa

No 3% · Sí 81% · Quizás 16% 110 votes
Sí · 81%
Quizás · 16%
La tendencia necesita votos de al menos 2 días distintos.

Discusión

no comments

Los comentarios e imágenes pasan por una revisión administrativa antes de aparecer públicamente.

12 jury checks · más reciente hace 1 día
03 Jul 2026 2 jurors · indeciso, indeciso indeciso
27 Jun 2026 2 jurors · indeciso, puede indeciso
22 Jun 2026 2 jurors · no puede, indeciso indeciso
16 Jun 2026 3 jurors · indeciso, puede, indeciso indeciso
11 Jun 2026 4 jurors · indeciso, indeciso, puede, indeciso indeciso
06 Jun 2026 3 jurors · indeciso, indeciso, indeciso indeciso
31 May 2026 3 jurors · indeciso, puede, indeciso indeciso
26 May 2026 4 jurors · indeciso, puede, indeciso, indeciso indeciso
20 May 2026 4 jurors · no puede, indeciso, indeciso, indeciso indeciso
15 May 2026 4 jurors · puede, puede, indeciso, indeciso indeciso estado cambiado
12 May 2026 3 jurors · no puede, no puede, no puede no puede
11 May 2026 2 jurors · no puede, no puede no puede estado cambiado

Cada fila es una comprobación de jurado independiente. Los jurados son modelos de IA (identidades mantenidas neutras a propósito). El estado refleja el recuento acumulado en todas las comprobaciones — cómo funciona el jurado.

Más en Judgment

¿Nos faltó uno?

Revisamos semanalmente.