Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championship –
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 8:23 am
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
No current (strongest) Stockfish...No strongest Houdini = Sham World Computer Championship. Just sayin' what we are all thinking.
-
- Posts: 5566
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
The usual connotation is one of secrecy. Private agenda as opposed to public agenda. Make the private agenda public and it is no longer private.hgm wrote:Because they told so. 'Private' is not the same as 'secret', right?syzygy wrote:And how would you know about their private agendas? You hacked them?
A threat to ICGA-type tournaments...I don't see why you think it would be any threat to ICGA.The existence of SF may well be a "threat" to ICGA-type tournaments, but that is not SF's fault. Nor does it have to be anybody else's fault.
Many programmers collaborating on a single engine does not fit well with the ICGA approach, which aims at individual or small groups of programmers.It is a threat to commercial Chess programming, for sure, but 'the more the merrier' definitely holds for ICGA and Chess engines.
Anyway, "the more the merrier" does not exactly apply to a 2-engine "tournament".
What is your explanation for the demise of their tournaments? Is it entirely due to their own doing?
-
- Posts: 27815
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
'Private' as in 'private property'.syzygy wrote:The usual connotation is one of secrecy.
Still same response. Why should it be a threat to ICGA-type tournaments. What are 'ICGA-type tournaments' anyway? Tournaments that require presence?A threat to ICGA-type tournaments...
I don't think so. What aspect of the 'ICGA approach' do you see as troublesome for large open-source projects? Any of the authors could enter it; GPL will be recognized as implicit permission by the other authors to do so.Many programmers collaborating on a single engine does not fit well with the ICGA approach, which aims at individual or small groups of programmers.
Indeed. It is obviously also not what ICGA is striving for. But you have to adapt to the circumstances.Anyway, "the more the merrier" does not exactly apply to a 2-engine "tournament".
Lack of sponsors. No one is interested in computer Chess these days. Having computers play Chess doesn't promote sales of anything other than the Chess programs itself. Lack of funding makes it impossible to have the tournament in attractive locations, and the computer Chess community has to foot the bill itself.What is your explanation for the demise of their tournaments? Is it entirely due to their own doing?
-
- Posts: 5566
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
We may have had this discussion before. It is blatantly not the case that releasing code under the GPL implies permission for the author's name to be listed on the entry form of whatever engine in whatever tournament. What the GPL means is stated in the GPL itself.hgm wrote:GPL will be recognized as implicit permission by the other authors to do so.
(Not to mention the problem that any author's name can only be listed once in case of ICGA tournaments.)
Were there anything in your argument (and a tournament organiser could put something in it by stating in the rules that the author's permission is not required for code released under GPL), then anyone could take/fork/whatever Stockfish and submit it.
I don't think there is less public interest in computer chess than in the Rybka days.Lack of sponsors. No one is interested in computer Chess these days. Having computers play Chess doesn't promote sales of anything other than the Chess programs itself. Lack of funding makes it impossible to have the tournament in attractive locations, and the computer Chess community has to foot the bill itself.What is your explanation for the demise of their tournaments? Is it entirely due to their own doing?
-
- Posts: 4833
- Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:15 pm
- Location: Philippines
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
Perhaps of the thought that only few are capable of using a system like the one used by Jonny.mjlef wrote:I want people to know that although I posted the announcement at David Levy's request, I do not agree with:Ferdy wrote:Does this mean only 4 participants are accepted? or more can be accepted but they can only offer 1000 euros to each of 4 participants?mjlef wrote:For the 2017 World Computer Chess Championship we are changing the format, removing the entry fee, and offering an expenses budget to each of the contestants. Our aim for 2017 will be to attract the strongest participants. There will be only 4 contestants, each of whom will receive 1,000 Euro for their expenses from the ICGA.
Regarding attracting the strongest participants, perhaps ICGA should just invite the Stockfish team.
a. limiting WCCC to just 4 entries (David does say WCSC is not limited)
Sort of like this year will be the candidates tournament. The top 2 will be matched next year to determine the world champion.mjlef wrote:b. excluding all but the top two programs from this year from entering WCCC next year.
Agree.mjlef wrote:Both seem unfair to me. Programs change a lot from year to year so who knows which ones will be strongest next year?
I thought of creating a qualification system to enter the candidates tournament for 2017.mjlef wrote:Restricting them could mean we do not even have the two most qualified programs. to me "World" should mean everyone. I do know space limits will mean we cannot host a huge number, but things like estimated elo could be used to select the top X programs that will "fit" in a playing room.
1. Pick 1 from CCRL rating group
2. Pick 1 from CEGT
3. Pick 1 from Frank
4. The same for other well known rating group
5. If the player is already selected then pick next player
Probably the list could be
1. Komodo
2. Stockfish
3. Houdini
4. Shredder
5. Pick 2 from sponsors
6. Pick 2 from ICGA
7. Perhaps more depending on the budget
These engines then will be provided with some incentives, not just the normal expenses but some compensations.
Can't really believe that human tournaments are getting millions of attention and yet these hardworking programmers have nothing. Most people are now using engines to prepare tournaments.
-
- Posts: 5566
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
The ones that sell their program get paid.Ferdy wrote:Can't really believe that human tournaments are getting millions of attention and yet these hardworking programmers have nothing. Most people are now using engines to prepare tournaments.
The ones that do it for fun get the fun.
-
- Posts: 2488
- Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 8:19 pm
- Full name: Rasmus Althoff
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
In a market economy, the price of something is not related to its cost, but to demand and supply. It's just when the price goes below the cost, that thing will not make it if it's commercial. Many chess programmers are not paid at all because it's a passion project.Ferdy wrote:Can't really believe that human tournaments are getting millions of attention and yet these hardworking programmers have nothing.
Even for human chess events, it's tough. Human masters have to capitalise on other things. Carlsen is not just smart over the board, he also used his popularity for some fashion label.
Do you remember the WCC when Carlsen lost a game to Karjakin and rushed out, violating the rules and risking a fine? It looked stupid and emotional, but media covered his behaviour and made gossip. Pure gold and actually smart even if it was dumb. Now engines don't rush out, do they? No story, no money.
-
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 8:23 am
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
and in any case, there is no 'soul' in engine vs engine games. Not really...but seeing a human player go all out for a win...saving a desperate position...stalking, then pouncing - it's things like these that make humans enjoy the game, not a bunch of 'ones and zeroe's' coming into conflict.
-
- Posts: 27815
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
You don't need legal permission to write anyones name anywhere. If someone asks me who is author of Shredder, I can write Stephan Meyer-Kahlen, without consulting Stephan in any way. And Shredder is not even open source. The GPL actually states that it is not possible to put restrictions of any kind on the software, other than that modifications must be released under GPL. Not being allowed to mention the author would be such a restriction.syzygy wrote:We may have had this discussion before. It is blatantly not the case that releasing code under the GPL implies permission for the author's name to be listed on the entry form of whatever engine in whatever tournament. What the GPL means is stated in the GPL itself.
This doesn't seem to be a problem. Eugene Nalimov, for example, used to be mentioned many times. Many engine's used his EGT probing code. This is a moot point anyway, as I don't think any of the contributors to Stockfish wants to enter an engine of his own. The real problem is exactly the opposite: no one wants to enter an engine at all.(Not to mention the problem that any author's name can only be listed once in case of ICGA tournaments.)
Beside, the ICGA rule that each author can enter only once can be interpreted in a flexible way, after rounding to the nearest integer. That would make it OK for someone that enters an engine that is 100% his to still contribute 5% to each of 10 other engines. This could be supplemented with a condition that he should not have contributed more than 5% to any individual other engine.
I am pretty sure the ICGA would be willing to use this interpretation, should the need arise.
It would certainly not be illegal to do that. (I think it is actually what TCEC does...) It is purely up to ICGA to decide what they will accept. They are not likely to accept a registration anyone who has not made a real contribution. If I were to enter Stockfish, they would most certainly refuse it. If a major contributor or even a non-contributor with a prominent position in the project would enter it, they would most certainly accept it. They are not seeking to exclude anyone.Were there anything in your argument (and a tournament organiser could put something in it by stating in the rules that the author's permission is not required for code released under GPL), then anyone could take/fork/whatever Stockfish and submit it.
It is declining all the time. In the Rybka days there were also only 10 participants. Last year there were 9. In "Rybka days" the WCCC was held in Amsterdam, Beijing, Pamplona, Kanazawa and Tilburg. Amsterdam and Tilburg are in the Netherlands, indicative of the fact that no real sponsor could be found. Beijing and Kanazawa sponsored because of their interest in Go / Xiangqi / Shogi, and did not care much about the Chess that came with it. That only leaves Pamplona, which I think was mainly government sponsored because of some cultural festivities there that they felt also needed some scientific / technological dressing. Not really an encouraging record.I don't think there is less public interest in computer chess than in the Rybka days.
-
- Posts: 5566
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Re: Important announcement: World Computer Chess Championshi
Oh come on. Fraud is a crime. The ICGA entry form asks you to declare that the persons whose names are listed have given permission.hgm wrote:You don't need legal permission to write anyones name anywhere.syzygy wrote:We may have had this discussion before. It is blatantly not the case that releasing code under the GPL implies permission for the author's name to be listed on the entry form of whatever engine in whatever tournament. What the GPL means is stated in the GPL itself.
GPL is about copyright. Entering a rightfully owned program in an ICGA tournament is not an infringement of copyright. But this is separate from the act of fraud just described.If someone asks me who is author of Shredder, I can write Stephan Meyer-Kahlen, without consulting Stephan in any way. And Shredder is not even open source. The GPL actually states that it is not possible to put restrictions of any kind on the software, other than that modifications must be released under GPL. Not being allowed to mention the author would be such a restriction.
The Hyatt-trick, but that trick cannot be stretched forever.This doesn't seem to be a problem. Eugene Nalimov, for example, used to be mentioned many times. Many engine's used his EGT probing code. This is a moot point anyway, as I don't think any of the contributors to Stockfish wants to enter an engine of his own. The real problem is exactly the opposite: no one wants to enter an engine at all.(Not to mention the problem that any author's name can only be listed once in case of ICGA tournaments.)
It is not a moot point, as many engines exist that are very much based on SF.