Comment by chongli

For one, because chess players are hardly judges of what is and what isn't AI.

On the other hand, they happen to be great judges of human- vs engine- style of play. If you ask any of the top players who have spent time reviewing games by chess engines, I think you'll find a consensus around the belief that Alpha Zero and LCZero play far more human-like moves than do engines like Stockfish.

The traditional engine tends to be extremely conservative and materialistic, only playing a sacrifice when it has calculated a line which recovers the material with interest (or forces checkmate). The so-called AIs don't do this. You're far more likely to see them sacrifice material for a long-term positional advantage, like a great human player would.

From my experience looking at Alpha Zero and LCZero wins against Stockfish, one of the more common patterns I see is a sacrifice by the AI which gives such a dominant position that one or more of Stockfish's pieces become uselessly trapped behind their own pawns. It's this sort of position which seems perfectly tailored to exploit Stockfish's materialistic nature.