Vas Rajlich Video...

[mcostalba]

I think you failed to listen properly to the question. The question was how he got started and when he got started Fruit was not available as source. I see nothing wrong with going through all papers before you get started on a project as that give you a solid foundation. If he would have started from a source code engine like Crafty (he mentions that) I doubt he would have been able to see what is missing or how things could be improved. I wouldn't laugh at this as he seems to be on the right track. Maybe he saw something that everyone had missed and thus that is why he was able to get this monumental jump in chess engine strength. Something no other chess programmer was able to do. Maybe other chess programmers would have done better to also read up on the basics and set a solid foundation before seeing source code and figuring why the ideas in those sources work, or why there would be a better way to make an idea work better.

I would like to clarify a couple of things that perhaps I have not well expressed in my post.

1) Reading papers is a good thing to do. If from my write it seems I think is not then I apologize because I have not well expressed my opinion.

2) The question was: "What chess engines in public domain when you got started had the biggest influence on the earliest versions of Rybka?" The question was not "What ideas /literature influenced you more?"

Now the point is that he is not answering to that question, but he is trying to "play hide", to avoid the direct answer, and found a safe but not pertinent answer in academic papers.


3) He talks about Crafty. Crafty is NOT a GPL program. Its sources are freely available, but it is not a GPL program, this makes an enormous difference. Perhaps for not software license specialist or not programmers this appears as almost tha same, but it is absolutely not the same and Vas knows it very well. He can speak about Crafty (not that also in this case he tries to avoid saying he took Crafty's sources for a reading) just because is not GPL otherwise, IMHO, he would have skipped also that part The difference is that if use code from a GPL software in my program I am legally forced to release _also_ my program as open-source. If the original software is not GPL then I am not.


I remain on my opinion, I would have had a better impression of him if he had stripped that question and the corresponding answer from the list.

[M ANSARI]

I think you failed to listen properly to the question. The question was how he got started and when he got started Fruit was not available as source. I see nothing wrong with going through all papers before you get started on a project as that give you a solid foundation. If he would have started from a source code engine like Crafty (he mentions that) I doubt he would have been able to see what is missing or how things could be improved. I wouldn't laugh at this as he seems to be on the right track. Maybe he saw something that everyone had missed and thus that is why he was able to get this monumental jump in chess engine strength. Something no other chess programmer was able to do. Maybe other chess programmers would have done better to also read up on the basics and set a solid foundation before seeing source code and figuring why the ideas in those sources work, or why there would be a better way to make an idea work better.

I would like to clarify a couple of things that perhaps I have not well expressed in my post.

1) Reading papers is a good thing to do. If from my write it seems I think is not then I apologize because I have not well expressed my opinion.

2) The question was: "What chess engines in public domain when you got started had the biggest influence on the earliest versions of Rybka?" The question was not "What ideas /literature influenced you more?"

Now the point is that he is not answering to that question, but he is trying to "play hide", to avoid the direct answer, and found a safe but not pertinent answer in academic papers.


3) He talks about Crafty. Crafty is NOT a GPL program. Its sources are freely available, but it is not a GPL program, this makes an enormous difference. Perhaps for not software license specialist or not programmers this appears as almost tha same, but it is absolutely not the same and Vas knows it very well. He can speak about Crafty (not that also in this case he tries to avoid saying he took Crafty's sources for a reading) just because is not GPL otherwise, IMHO, he would have skipped also that part The difference is that if use code from a GPL software in my program I am legally forced to release _also_ my program as open-source. If the original software is not GPL then I am not.


I remain on my opinion, I would have had a better impression of him if he had stripped that question and the corresponding answer from the list.

The question was something like:

"What chess engine in the public domain, when you got started, had the biggest influence on the earliest versions of Rybka?"

It is quite obvious that they were talking about the earliest version of Rybka which was before Fruit sources were released. So I really don't think he was hiding behind anything. In his release notes of Rybka 1.0 beta, which came much later and made good use of knowledge from Fruit sources, Vas clearly gives credit to Fabien and Fruit. Something I might add many other professional engine writers have not done even though chances are that quite a few of them gained ideas from Fruit.

Although I don't want to sound like I am defending Vas, I think you guys should look at the progress of his engine. Many seem to think that Rybka's strength jump came after Fruit. I see it totally differently ... Rybka 1.0, although a revolutionary engine for the time, was very raw and not nearly as impressive as Rybka 3's HUGE jump in strength. Rybka's strength gain is due to Vas's ability to find new ways to program a chess engine in playing stronger. This progress was incrementally linear before Fruit and continued to be incrementally linear after Fruit. Give credit where credit is due.

[mcostalba]

The question was something like:

"What chess engine in the public domain, when you got started, had the biggest influence on the earliest versions of Rybka?"

It is quite obvious that they were talking about the earliest version of Rybka which was before Fruit sources were released. So I really don't think he was hiding behind anything. In his release notes of Rybka 1.0 beta, which came much later and made good use of knowledge from Fruit sources, Vas clearly gives credit to Fabien and Fruit. Something I might add many other professional engine writers have not done even though chances are that quite a few of them gained ideas from Fruit.

Although I don't want to sound like I am defending Vas, I think you guys should look at the progress of his engine. Many seem to think that Rybka's strength jump came after Fruit. I see it totally differently ... Rybka 1.0, although a revolutionary engine for the time, was very raw and not nearly as impressive as Rybka 3's HUGE jump in strength. Rybka's strength gain is due to Vas's ability to find new ways to program a chess engine in playing stronger. This progress was incrementally linear before Fruit and continued to be incrementally linear after Fruit. Give credit where credit is due.

I consider all the Rybka's series a great achievement in computer chess. I also think (although I never saw the sources) that Rybka 3 is completely another beast from Rybka 1 or Fruit or anything else, this is just my opinion because I don't have evidences not having looked at Rybka's sources nor other top engine's closed sources.

But the point that has been discussed here 1000 times is a bit different. The point is not if Rybka's series is a great and original series because I think almost everybody agrees on this.

The point is that _if_ and is a big _if_ (and always will be until one of the first Rybka's sources are not disclosed), if Rybka 1.0 took some code from a GPL program, because in that case, not only Rybka 1.0, but the whole series should have been sold (given for free is not mandatory) together with its sources. And it doesn't matter if Rybka 3 is totally different. But it doesn't matter not because I or someone else says so, but because the law says so and GPL enforcements are very strict and very well known regarding this point.

Returning to the question: "What chess engine in the public domain, when you got started, had the biggest influence on the earliest versions of Rybka?"

You correctly pointed out that interviewer was talking about the earliest version of Rybka, and I also add to that interviewer was talking about public domain software. This to casual reader could go unnoticed also because it is a technical/legal term that goes beyond the current meaning. Public domain refers to software that is not limited by having a copyright, and so cannot be GPL.

IOW, rewriting in common English the question it sounds like this: "What chess engine NOT GPL and before the release of Rybka 1.0 had the biggest influence on you?"

Of course the question was carefully handcrafted to avoid going into troubles, as was the answer BTW.

[Alexander Schmidt]

when he got started Fruit was not available as source.

Yes, thats true. When he started he wrote a program that was at the 2000 ELO border. It was completely different to the actual Rybka, for example it had MTD(f) search.

Then came Fruit.

Then came Rybka 1.0 Beta, that was _very_ similar to Fruit, and not to former Rybkas.

[M ANSARI]

when he got started Fruit was not available as source.

Yes, thats true. When he started he wrote a program that was at the 2000 ELO border. It was completely different to the actual Rybka, for example it had MTD(f) search.

Then came Fruit.

Then came Rybka 1.0 Beta, that was _very_ similar to Fruit, and not to former Rybkas.

Again, I really think that Rybka had a progressive gain in strength, which is normal in the evolution of ANY chess engine. This goes more to show that Vas started from the ground up and slowly improved his engine. Many here are dwelling on Rybka 1.0 beta jump in strength and want to place this jump only due to Fruit. I disagree as this increase in Rybka's strength has been methodically linear and if anything, Rybka's real strength jump seems to be in Rybka 3 and not Rybka 1.0 beta. While you might realize that Rybka 3 is a totally new animal to Rybka 1.0 beta, many want to use the excuse that Rybka 1.0 beta somehow might have gained from Fruit and therefore it is a free for all to rob Vas of any of his code. Rybka is improving daily and Rybka 3 was released about 2 years ago. I recently looked at some games played by R3 against Stockfish 1.6s and I can see at least 10 games out of 100 that show huge flaws in Rybka's play. I would think that in 2 years, Vas would have improved Rybka dramatically more. Unfortunately due to Rybka 3 clones we now will not see a full strength R4 on our home computers. Some want to blame Vas for the changes in his business model, but I tend to blame the people who stole his code and deliberately tried to damage him financially.

[Leto]

I disagree as this increase in Rybka's strength has been methodically linear and if anything, Rybka's real strength jump seems to be in Rybka 3 and not Rybka 1.0 beta.

It astonishes me how you are able to disregard facts completely, as if you lived in a dream and want the others dream with you.

Here is an excerpt from CCRL blitz:

Code: Select all

Rybka 3 64-bit          3176	
Rybka 2.3.2a 64-bit     3072	
Rybka 2.2n2 64-bit      3025	
Rybka 1.1 64-bit	     2989
Rybka 1.0 Beta 64-bit	2938

It is clear that Rybka 3 jumped 100 elos from Rybka 2, and roughly 240 elos relative to 1.0 beta. This jump took 3 years.
The beta is at least 700 elo stronger than the Rybka from 2004. The increase took 1 year.

You call this linear.

What is this Rybka engine that is 700 elo weaker than Rybka 1 called, and where can I obtain it?

[Harvey Williamson]

I disagree as this increase in Rybka's strength has been methodically linear and if anything, Rybka's real strength jump seems to be in Rybka 3 and not Rybka 1.0 beta.

It astonishes me how you are able to disregard facts completely, as if you lived in a dream and want the others dream with you.

Here is an excerpt from CCRL blitz:

Code: Select all

Rybka 3 64-bit          3176	
Rybka 2.3.2a 64-bit     3072	
Rybka 2.2n2 64-bit      3025	
Rybka 1.1 64-bit	     2989
Rybka 1.0 Beta 64-bit	2938

It is clear that Rybka 3 jumped 100 elos from Rybka 2, and roughly 240 elos relative to 1.0 beta. This jump took 3 years.
The beta is at least 700 elo stronger than the Rybka from 2004. The increase took 1 year.

You call this linear.

What is this Rybka engine that is 700 elo weaker than Rybka 1 called, and where can I obtain it?

Here in CCT6

No Name Feder Rtg 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Hiarcs, 2812 28:W 16:W 10:L 20:D 34:W 13:W 15:W 9:W 3:D
2. Junior, 2701 29:D 7:W 14:W 5:L 38:W 19:W 16:W 3:D 9:D
3. Crafty, 2607 30:W 20:W 12:W 10:D 8:W 9:W 21:D 2:D 1:D
4. Rebel 12, 2600 31:W 19:W 9:L 21:L 33:W 25:W 5:L 7:W 40:L
5. Ruffian, 2595 32:W 22:D 34:W 2:W 9:L 20:W 4:W 21:W 10:L
6. Quark, 2586 33:W 21:D 15:D 19:L 36:W 31:L 26:W 24:W 14:L
7. Arasan, 2557 34:L 2:L 48:W 36:L 45:W 39:W 32:W 4:L 31:W
8. Searcher, 2532 35:W 23:W 13:W 9:L 3:L 40:D 38:W 10:L 16:W
9. Yace, 2531 36:W 26:W 4:W 8:W 5:W 3:L 10:D 1:L 2:D
10. Zappa, 2530 37:W 27:W 1:W 3:D 21:L 11:W 9:D 8:W 5:W
11. Falcon, 2500 38:W 34:D 22:D 40:W 19:D 10:L 23:L 28:W 51:L
12. Pepito, 2500 39:W 45:W 3:L 23:L 37:D 51:L 33:D 35:W 36:W
13. Green Light Chess, 2495 40:W 44:W 8:L 22:W 23:W 1:L 51:D 20:L 26:W
14. Comet B68, 2489 41:W 51:W 2:L 29:D 15:L 37:W 31:D 25:W 6:W
15. King of Kings, 2479 42:W 52:D 6:D 38:D 14:W 22:W 1:L 51:W 23:W
16. Post Modernist, 2471 43:W 1:L 33:W 51:W 31:W 21:D 2:L 40:D 8:L
17. Chezzz, 2468 44:L 40:L 54:W 42:L 46:W 38:L 45:W 34:D 28:W
18. Ikarus, 2466 45:L 29:D 43:W 39:D 40:L 36:L 41:L : :
19. The Baron, 2465 46:W 4:L 32:W 6:W 11:D 2:L 40:L 27:W 29:L
20. Pharaon, 2450 47:W 3:L 37:W 1:D 29:W 5:L 42:W 13:W 21:D
21. Thinker 4.5a, 2450 48:W 6:D 52:W 4:W 10:W 16:D 3:D 5:L 20:D
22. WildCat, 2425 49:W 5:D 11:D 13:L 39:W 15:L 27:D 29:L 37:W
23. XiniX, 2420 50:W 8:L 36:W 12:W 13:L 42:D 11:W 31:W 15:L
24. OliThink, 2400 51:L 39:L 47:W 35:W 42:L 41:W 36:W 6:L 33:L
25. BlackBishop, 2400 52:L 42:W 38:L 44:W 50:W 4:L 34:W 14:L 32:W
26. SpiderChess, 2396 53:W 9:L 39:D 31:L 52:W 29:W 6:L 38:W 13:L
27. Frenzee, 2380 54:W 10:L 40:L 45:D 28:W 34:D 22:D 19:L 38:L
28. Djinn, 2378 1:L 41:D 51:L 47:W 27:L 44:W 37:W 11:L 17:L
29. Movei, 2367 2:D 18:D 44:W 14:D 20:L 26:L 50:W 22:W 19:W
30. messchess, 2367 3:L 43:D 35:D 37:L 41:L 52:W 47:W 36:L 46:L
31. Amateur, 2361 4:L 46:W 45:W 26:W 16:L 6:W 14:D 23:L 7:L
32. Averno, 2354 5:L 47:W 19:L 41:W 51:L 49:W 7:L 42:W 25:L
33. Bodo, 2351 6:L 48:W 16:L 46:W 4:L 50:D 12:D 39:W 24:W
34. Butcher, 2337 7:W 11:D 5:L 52:W 1:L 27:D 25:L 17:D 42:L
35. Dorky 4.0, 2324 8:L 50:D 30:D 24:L 44:D 45:D 46:W 12:L 43:W
36. Chepla, 2323 9:L 49:W 23:L 7:W 6:L 18:W 24:L 30:W 12:L
37. Hossa, 2317 10:L 54:W 20:L 30:W 12:D 14:L 28:L 50:W 22:L
38. Amyan, 2292 11:L 53:W 25:W 15:D 2:L 17:W 8:L 26:L 27:W
39. Alarm, 2290 12:L 24:W 26:D 18:D 22:L 7:L 49:W 33:L 52:L
40. Bringer 1.9, 2283 13:L 17:W 27:W 11:L 18:W 8:D 19:W 16:D 4:W
41. Chompster, 2274 14:L 28:D 50:D 32:L 30:W 24:L 18:L : :
42. Tao 5.6, 2274 15:L 25:L 49:W 17:W 24:W 23:D 20:L 32:L 34:W
43. Tinker, 2232 16:L 30:D 18:L 50:L 53:D 46:L 54:W 47:W 35:L
44. Rascal, 2225 17:W 13:L 29:L 25:L 35:D 28:L 53:W 52:D 49:W
45. Nullmover, 2213 18:W 12:L 31:L 27:D 7:L 35:D 17:L 49:L 53:D
46. Chiron, 2200 19:L 31:L 53:W 33:L 17:L 43:W 35:L 48:W 30:W
47. SEE, 2196 20:L 32:L 24:L 28:L 54:W 53:W 30:L 43:L 48:D
48. Noonian Chess, 2128 21:L 33:L 7:L 53:D 49:L 54:W 52:L 46:L 47:D
49. 31337/Celes, 2127 22:L 36:L 42:L 54:W 48:W 32:L 39:L 45:W 44:L
50. Cheetah, 2104 23:L 35:D 41:D 43:W 25:L 33:D 29:L 37:L 54:W
51. Jonny 2.54, 2075 24:W 14:L 28:W 16:L 32:W 12:W 13:D 15:L 11:W
52. MatadorX, 2000 25:W 15:D 21:L 34:L 26:L 30:L 48:W 44:D 39:W
53. Rybka, 2000 26:L 38:L 46:L 48:D 43:D 47:L 44:L 54:W 45:D
54. Tohno, 1800 27:L 37:L 17:L 49:L 47:L 48:L 43:L 53:L 50:L

[M ANSARI]

Well if he had just picked up Crafty and used it as the basis of his code then he would have started with a 2600+ ELO engine to start with. He obviously decided to go a different way. I mean my God, do you really think Rybka is only strong due to Fruit ??? I think any reasonably gifted programmer can create a chess engine that will equal the strength of the strongest freely available source code by simply using the ideas gleaned from the code ... maybe he would raise some eyebrows if he managed to increase the playing strength even slightly higher than that. What I think is truly "astonishing" is moving this engine into the realms of what was once thought impossible. I can't help but feel there is a tinge of jealously by other programmers when it comes to Vas ... after all how can someone fresh from MIT simply go into a field that hundreds of extremely talented people have spent thousands of hourse on and trump them so quickly. Of course you can blame it on Fruit code, but be honest with yourself ... how much do you think Fruit helped Rybka ?? Vas says it is 20 ELO ... and you probably would laugh at that. But then again you would probably have had the same laugh if someone would have told you that he could improve Rybka 1.0 beta by a couple of hundred ELO points within 2 years.

[Alexander Schmidt]

I would never call an engine a clone only because of a incrase of strength like others do...

HNY

[Alexander Schmidt]

I mean my God, do you really think Rybka is only strong due to Fruit ??? I think any reasonably gifted programmer can create a chess engine

No, but Fruit was taken as a basis, and VR earns a lot of money with the work of someone else.

Obviously he was not able to create a good basis for his "genuine" ideas himself.