Critter 1.2 SEEMS to be a member of the Ippo family

[Laskos]

With Don's similarity tool Sim03, I got the similarity matrix as follows:


1) Critter 1.2 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
2) Houdini 1.5 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
3) IvanHoe B47cB (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
4) Komodo 2.03 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
5) Robbo 009 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
6) Rybka 3 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
7) Rybka 4 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
8) Shredder 10 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
9) Shredder 12 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
10) Stockfish 2.1.1 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. ----- 61.42 60.79 50.08 61.00 57.56 55.86 43.53 45.70 51.08
2. 61.42 ----- 62.36 49.60 62.55 55.85 54.39 43.28 45.99 51.04
3. 60.79 62.36 ----- 50.45 67.06 58.76 55.47 44.08 47.04 50.78
4. 50.08 49.60 50.45 ----- 50.46 51.92 50.52 44.11 45.96 47.52
5. 61.00 62.55 67.06 50.46 ----- 60.03 56.60 44.54 47.84 50.89
6. 57.56 55.85 58.76 51.92 60.03 ----- 58.93 45.39 48.79 50.85
7. 55.86 54.39 55.47 50.52 56.60 58.93 ----- 44.22 47.50 50.91
8. 43.53 43.28 44.08 44.11 44.54 45.39 44.22 ----- 51.92 43.98
9. 45.70 45.99 47.04 45.96 47.84 48.79 47.50 51.92 ----- 45.96
10. 51.08 51.04 50.78 47.52 50.89 50.85 50.91 43.98 45.96 -----




The dendrogram using IBM SPSS19, method being the average linkage between the groups and measure the Pearson correlation is



As one can see, Critter 1.2 is closer to open source Robbo 009 and IvanHoe 47 than Rybka 4 is to Rybka 3 or Robbo 009 to Rybka 3. At the same time, Komodo and Stockfish seem pretty clean of massive borrowing from Ippo & Co. code, at least in the eval. I put there Shredder 12 and Shredder 10 to highlight that they are totally unrelated to this mess. Besides that, the difference between Shredder 10 and 12 is something which I wanted to visualize.

To read the dendrogram: the distance on the horizontal axis to the common ancestor is the degree of relatedness, smaller the distance - more related. Ippo family clusters pretty clearly, at the same time preserving its relation with Rybka family.

All the best, and don't take my results as a hard proof.
Kai

[georgerifkin]

According to your test, it seems that Komodo and Stockfish are clean, right?

And what's this tool: Sim03? Where can I find it?

[Laskos]

According to your test, it seems that Komodo and Stockfish are clean, right?

And what's this tool: Sim03? Where can I find it?

Right, Komodo and Stockfish seem clean, at least in the eval part.
Maybe you can find Sim03 on Komodo page, or just ask Don to direct you, I forgot the link address.

Kai

[georgerifkin]

According to your test, it seems that Komodo and Stockfish are clean, right?

And what's this tool: Sim03? Where can I find it?

Right, Komodo and Stockfish seem clean, at least in the eval part.
Maybe you can find Sim03 on Komodo page, or just ask Don to direct you, I forgot the link address.

Kai

Thanks, I found it on Komodo web page.

[rvida]

Hi, Kai

1) Hunting for some publicity, eh?

2) Do you know what exactly is measured with sim03?

3) I will tell you a "secret". Houdini, Robbolito, Ippolit, etc. share same piece square tables. While the ones that Critter uses are not 100% identical but are very very close (differences are just because of rounding errors - Critter uses 1/256th of a pawn instead of 1/100 - for every practical purpose they can be called identical... they are working fine, and there are more reasonable ways to spend development time than to make them different just to make someone happy). I don't know about your programming skills but let's try an experiment: Take 2 different open source programs (let's say Crafty & Fruit) and force them to use the same exact PSQ tables. Now run them through sim03 and see the shocking result (and write a sensational post on a forum of your choice about one being a clone of the other...)

4) Sources of Critter are not top-secret. Although after version 0.42 I choose to go closed source, so far I have sent my sources to everyone who asked for them. Most of such requests concerned version 0.90, but a few people on this forum do have sources of v1.2 too (or the last beta before v1.2 release).

Richard

[Uri Blass]

Hi, Kai

1) Hunting for some publicity, eh?

2) Do you know what exactly is measured with sim03?

3) I will tell you a "secret". Houdini, Robbolito, Ippolit, etc. share same piece square tables. While the ones that Critter uses are not 100% identical but are very very close (differences are just because of rounding errors - Critter uses 1/256th of a pawn instead of 1/100 - for every practical purpose they can be called identical... they are working fine, and there are more reasonable ways to spend development time than to make them different just to make someone happy). I don't know about your programming skills but let's try an experiment: Take 2 different open source programs (let's say Crafty & Fruit) and force them to use the same exact PSQ tables. Now run them through sim03 and see the shocking result (and write a sensational post on a forum of your choice about one being a clone of the other...)

4) Sources of Critter are not top-secret. Although after version 0.42 I choose to go closed source, so far I have sent my sources to everyone who asked for them. Most of such requests concerned version 0.90, but a few people on this forum do have sources of v1.2 too (or the last beta before v1.2 release).

Richard

I believe that piece square table is only a small part of the evaluation.
there is also mobility evaluation and passed pawn evaluation and king safety evaluation.

I do not expect a big similiarity between 2 programs if they only share the same piece square table when they do not share other parts of the evaluation.

[Laskos]

Hi, Kai

1) Hunting for some publicity, eh?

Yes

2) Do you know what exactly is measured with sim03?

Yes.

3) I will tell you a "secret". Houdini, Robbolito, Ippolit, etc. share same piece square tables. While the ones that Critter uses are not 100% identical but are very very close (differences are just because of rounding errors - Critter uses 1/256th of a pawn instead of 1/100 - for every practical purpose they can be called identical... they are working fine, and there are more reasonable ways to spend development time than to make them different just to make someone happy). I don't know about your programming skills but let's try an experiment: Take 2 different open source programs (let's say Crafty & Fruit) and force them to use the same exact PSQ tables. Now run them through sim03 and see the shocking result (and write a sensational post on a forum of your choice about one being a clone of the other...)

4) Sources of Critter are not top-secret. Although after version 0.42 I choose to go closed source, so far I have sent my sources to everyone who asked for them. Most of such requests concerned version 0.90, but a few people on this forum do have sources of v1.2 too (or the last beta before v1.2 release).

Richard

Sorry if I misjudged, I wrote that it "seems" and to not take that as a proof. I would like to have a compiled Fruit and Crafty of similar strength with PSQ tables/mobility identical, to see what happens, but I am barely capable of modifying something without breaking another thing, hope someone else will do it.

Again, my apologies if I am totally wrong.

Kai

[rvida]

I believe that piece square table is only a small part of the evaluation.
there is also mobility evaluation and passed pawn evaluation and king safety evaluation.

I do not expect a big similiarity between 2 programs if they only share the same piece square table when they do not share other parts of the evaluation.

Uri, no need to "belive" or "expect/not expect"... Just try it!

I made such an experiment some time ago when there was a lengthy thread about the similarity tester. One poster (IIRC it was Milos) said that PSQT's alone are enough to made 2 engines look similar. I dont know whether this was just a wild guess or he made some research on this, but I wanted to prove or disprove this with my own tests.

On the other hand, I had a surprisingly low similarity result between two successive versions of Critter despite the same tables (and in fact, almost the whole evaluation). Very puzzling.

[tomgdrums]

With Don's similarity tool Sim03, I got the similarity matrix as follows:


1) Critter 1.2 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
2) Houdini 1.5 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
3) IvanHoe B47cB (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
4) Komodo 2.03 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
5) Robbo 009 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
6) Rybka 3 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
7) Rybka 4 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
8) Shredder 10 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
9) Shredder 12 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
10) Stockfish 2.1.1 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. ----- 61.42 60.79 50.08 61.00 57.56 55.86 43.53 45.70 51.08
2. 61.42 ----- 62.36 49.60 62.55 55.85 54.39 43.28 45.99 51.04
3. 60.79 62.36 ----- 50.45 67.06 58.76 55.47 44.08 47.04 50.78
4. 50.08 49.60 50.45 ----- 50.46 51.92 50.52 44.11 45.96 47.52
5. 61.00 62.55 67.06 50.46 ----- 60.03 56.60 44.54 47.84 50.89
6. 57.56 55.85 58.76 51.92 60.03 ----- 58.93 45.39 48.79 50.85
7. 55.86 54.39 55.47 50.52 56.60 58.93 ----- 44.22 47.50 50.91
8. 43.53 43.28 44.08 44.11 44.54 45.39 44.22 ----- 51.92 43.98
9. 45.70 45.99 47.04 45.96 47.84 48.79 47.50 51.92 ----- 45.96
10. 51.08 51.04 50.78 47.52 50.89 50.85 50.91 43.98 45.96 -----




The dendrogram using IBM SPSS19, method being the average linkage between the groups and measure the Pearson correlation is



As one can see, Critter 1.2 is closer to open source Robbo 009 and IvanHoe 47 than Rybka 4 is to Rybka 3 or Robbo 009 to Rybka 3. At the same time, Komodo and Stockfish seem pretty clean of massive borrowing from Ippo & Co. code, at least in the eval. I put there Shredder 12 and Shredder 10 to highlight that they are totally unrelated to this mess. Besides that, the difference between Shredder 10 and 12 is something which I wanted to visualize.

To read the dendrogram: the distance on the horizontal axis to the common ancestor is the degree of relatedness, smaller the distance - more related. Ippo family clusters pretty clearly, at the same time preserving its relation with Rybka family.

All the best, and don't take my results as a hard proof.
Kai

I kind of think the "similarity tester" is a bunch of smoke and mirrors and doesn't show much at ALL!

[tomgdrums]

According to your test, it seems that Komodo and Stockfish are clean, right?

And what's this tool: Sim03? Where can I find it?

And yet Don has admitted to getting ideas from the Ippolitts so again the Sim test proves nothing.

It is most likely a waste of time.