Interesting article. Too bad a don't have a subscription to read the paper.

The bot played like 10 000 hands. There is no way that is enough to prove it's better or worse than the opponents.

More so in no-limit where some key all-ins can turn the game up side down. The variance is higher than limit or fixed, right?

I did a heads up Texas holdem fixed bot with "counter factual regret minimization" like 8 years ago from a paper I read. It had to play like 100 000 hands vs a crappy reference bot to prove it was better.

Strategy detection in so short games is probably worthless.

The edge is probably in seeing who are tired or drunk in paper poker.