Uri Blass wrote:ThomasJMiller wrote:Will programmers receive toys and candy or coal this Christmas? To find out, let's check Santa's Naughty or Nice List
Latest releases of many commercial and free engines have been included together with the most important open source ones.
Testing all the engines and preparing the dendogram has taken a lot of time so I wouldn't like this thread to be moved to the Engine Origins subforum. Therefore, please, avoid making comments like XXX is clone of YYY or so.
Everyone can nowadays read a dendogram, so you can draw your own conclusions by yourself.
Thanks to Adam Hair who helped me improve selfsimilarity results.
Can you explain the graph?
I understand that movei is similiar to gnuchess5.50 or fruit2.1(not sure if to both of them or only to one of them) but I do not understand the meaning of the numbers in the graph(when I say similiar I mean relative to the difference of movei with other engines).
Note that I am not surprised if you find that movei is more similiar to fruit2.1 relative to other engines because in the latest movei's before I stopped developing it I added some evaluation terms based on ideas that I understood from fruit2.1's code.
Uri
To make it simple, Movei is not significantly related to any engine from this graph.
There are three clear clusters
1) Heron, Stockfish 4, Amitis, SF DD, SF 2.3.1, SF 3
2) H4, Robodini, IH, Vitruvius, Robbolito, Fire, DSaros, Bouquet, Critter, Strelka 5.5, BlackMamba, Gull2.3
3) Naum4.2, Strelka2, Murka3, Fruit2.1, Fruit2.2.1, D Onno, Hamsters, Alaric, colossus
There are 4-5 engines that require a closer analysis that cannot be extracted from what we see. The rest seems to be very unclear, or not related at all.
The farther to the right is the branch point, the less significant is the relationship of the leaves. But you cannot know from this only where to draw a line of "significance".
Miguel