[LionHeart1]

The case: player plays with a robot and he bids contrary to robot's convention. The automatic description mirrors the robot's interpretation and the player doesn't correct it. This false information affects the result of the deal. May the TD modify the result?

[paulg]

The English Bridge Union, in its Blue Book (PDF), addresses this in section 9 A 5 BBO robots: agreements and explanations. In essence it is fine, part of the game, and not a reason to adjust.

Quote

When robots are playing on BBO, the explanations of the calls of both members of the partnership (robot or human) are provided by the platform: the explanation of the call made by a human (playing with a robot) is the robot's explanation.
The robots will try to make the right call and will also provide an explanation, but the call will not always match the explanation. A player playing with a robot may choose to make a call which does not match the explanation that the robot will give. Such departures from the robots 'announced understandings' are legal, as they cannot lead to an implicit understanding.
If a player makes a call knowing that it does not match the explanation, and the player wants to avoid inexperienced opponents being misled by the explanation, the player can tell the opponents (in 'table' chat) that the explanation was not the player's intended meaning.

I don't know if higher authorities (EBL, WBF) have a view.