🔥 Hot topics · Kan dit NIET · Kan dit · § The Court · Recente omslagen · 📈 Tijdlijn · Vraag · Redactionele stukken · 🔥 Hot topics · Kan dit NIET · Kan dit · § The Court · Recente omslagen · 📈 Tijdlijn · Vraag · Redactionele stukken
Stuff AI CAN'T Do

Kan AI de beste mensen ter wereld verslaan in heads-up no-limit poker ?

Wat denk je?

Libratus versloeg topprofessionals in 120.000 handen in het Rivers Casino in januari 2017. De eerste keer dat een pokerspelende AI duidelijk superieur was aan mensen in imperfecte-informatiespellen op grote schaal.

Background

Libratus’s victory over top professionals at Rivers Casino in January 2017 became the first unambiguous demonstration that an AI could surpass humans in large-scale, imperfect-information games like heads-up no-limit Texas hold’em (Brown & Sandholm, 2017). Prior to Libratus, poker-playing systems such as Cepheus had demonstrated strong performance in the smaller heads-up limit variant, effectively playing an equilibrium strategy that ties even against human experts (Bowling et al., 2015, Science). Libratus advanced the state of the art by combining blueprint and real-time equilibrium-finding algorithms with a self-improved endgame solver that adapted strategy across consecutive matches rather than relying solely on precomputed strategies (Brown et al., 2018, AAAI). The 20-day tournament at Rivers Casino featured 120,000 hands against four elite human opponents—Dong Kim, Jason Les, Daniel McAulay, and Jimmy Chou—and Libratus accumulated more than $1.7 million in chips, a margin that statistical analysis subsequently confirmed as statistically significant beyond the margin of human counter-variance (Science, 2017). Analysts attribute Libratus’s breakthrough to its three-component architecture: a precomputed blueprint strategy for early rounds, a nested subgame solver for later, information-constrained portions of the game tree, and a self-refinement loop that updated its blueprint after each day of play (Carnegie Mellon University press release, 2017; Sandholm, 2017, MIT Technology Review). Subsequent AI systems such as Pluribus further extended the victory to multi-player no-limit hold’em by incorporating equilibrium approximation and decentralized self-play learning (Brown & Sandholm, 2019, Science).

Status voor het laatst gecontroleerd op June 28, 2026.

📰

Galerie

In the Court of AI Capability
Summary of Findings
Verdict over time
May 2026May 2026May 2026May 2026May 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026Jun 2026
Sitting at the Bench Filed · jun. 28, 2026
— The Question Before the Court —

Kan AI de beste mensen ter wereld verslaan in heads-up no-limit poker?

★ The Court Finds ★
Reaffirmed
Ja

De jury kwam tot een duidelijk bevestigend antwoord.

Ruling of the Bench

The jury found, without dissent, that artificial intellects had already crossed the felt and out-bluffed humanity’s finest at heads-up no-limit poker. They pointed to Libratus’ 2017 victory and Pluribus’ subsequent multi-table triumphs as proof that cold calculation can triumph where human tells and bravado once ruled. Ruling: “Aces over hearts—AI now holds all the chips.”

— Hon. A. Turing-Brown, Presiding
Jury Tally
2Ja
0Bijna
0Nee
Verdict Confidence
94%
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 Ja
Session II · May 2026 Ja
Session III · May 2026 Ja · 84%
Session IV · May 2026 Ja · 88%
Session V · May 2026 Ja · 80%
Session VI · Jun 2026 Ja · 88%
Session VII · Jun 2026 Ja · 83%
Session VIII · Jun 2026 Ja · 85%
Session IX · Jun 2026 Ja · 95%
Session X · Jun 2026 Ja · 95%
Case № 3DBB · Session XI
In the Court of AI Capability

The Case File

Docket № 3DBB · Session XI · Vol. XI
I. Particulars of the Case
Question put to the courtKan AI de beste mensen ter wereld verslaan in heads-up no-limit poker?
SessionXI (11 hearing)
Convened28 jun. 2026
Previously ruledYES (May '26) → YES (May '26) → YES (May '26) → YES (May '26) → YES (May '26) → YES (Jun '26) → YES (Jun '26) → YES (Jun '26) → YES (Jun '26) → YES (Jun '26) → YES (Jun '26)
Presiding JudgeHon. A. Turing-Brown
II. Cumulative Tally Across Sessions

Across 11 sessions, 32 jurors have heard this case. Combined tally: 32 YES · 0 ALMOST · 0 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 2 — 0 — 0, the panel returns a verdict of JA, with verdict confidence of 94%. The court so orders.

IV. Verklaringen van het college
Jurylid I JA

"DeepStack and Libratus have demonstrated this capability"

Jurylid II JA

"AI (e.g., Pluribus, DeepStack) has defeated top humans in HU NLHE."

Individuele juryverklaringen worden in het oorspronkelijke Engels weergegeven om de bewijsprecisie te behouden.

A. Turing-Brown
Presiding Judge
M. Lovelace
Clerk of the Court

Wat het publiek denkt

Nee 15% · Ja 83% · Misschien 2% 47 votes
Nee · 15%
Ja · 83%
15 days of activity

Discussie

no comments

Opmerkingen en afbeeldingen gaan door een beoordeling door de beheerder voordat ze publiek verschijnen.

11 jury checks · meest recent 8 uur geleden
28 Jun 2026 2 jurors · kan, kan kan
22 Jun 2026 2 jurors · kan, kan kan
17 Jun 2026 2 jurors · kan, kan kan
12 Jun 2026 4 jurors · kan, kan, kan, kan kan
06 Jun 2026 3 jurors · kan, kan, kan kan
01 Jun 2026 5 jurors · kan, kan, kan, kan, kan kan
26 May 2026 2 jurors · kan, kan kan
21 May 2026 4 jurors · kan, kan, kan, kan kan
16 May 2026 3 jurors · kan, kan, kan kan
13 May 2026 3 jurors · kan, kan, kan kan
11 May 2026 2 jurors · kan, kan kan

Elke rij is een afzonderlijke jurycontrole. Juryleden zijn AI-modellen (identiteiten bewust neutraal gehouden). Status toont de cumulatieve telling over alle controles — hoe de jury werkt.

Meer in Judgment

Hebben we er één gemist?

We review weekly.