(bot evaluation itself is not necessarily better than pros, even Alphago was top amateur only without search)

Be carefull, it's "Alphago without reading" vs "top amateur with reading"
The "problem" is that humans will automatically read (and ponder on their opponent time), so it's impossible to really have "humans without reading" as a comparaison.

Be carefull, it's "Alphago without reading" vs "top amateur with reading"

The "problem" is that humans will automatically read (and ponder on their opponent time), so it's impossible to really have "humans without reading" as a comparaison.

I've failed to keep up with which engine is doing what, but I thought it was pretty settled that both Leela Zero and Elf could reliably beat professionals. Is that not the case?

Not in that comparison. However, as I recall, De Groot managed long ago to study human first impressions at chess. In his research pros usually not only saw the best move, they saw a main line of play. That is not what neural networks can do, but such seeing is not the same as the conscious process called reading, either.

Of course it's possible the pros had some good response that Elf didn't see (particularly involving ladders), but when it comes to judgement of positions, particularly quiet ones or even fighting without low liberties I tend to think Elf is better than the pros.