Strelka in Tournaments?

[swami]

Not wishing to bring back the intense debate about whether or not Strelka is a clone,I would like to ask if some members include it in their tournament?I wonder if Strelka is the legal engine?I didn't follow the debate because I was not around in talkchess during that time and I remember that there had been a lot of license GPL talks from Michael, Hristo etc and I vaguely recall someone saying that it is a legal engine,Maybe it was either Michael or Hristo or both.

I wonder is Strelka is eligible to play in Official Tournaments such as paderborn, CCT etc?
CCRL had been testing Strelka, so I assume it is a legal engine but I'm not sure about it.

[Christopher Conkie]

CCRL is run by a Russian.

It is not hard to understand why he likes it either. He is wrong of course but at least he made his own mind up.

[Graham Banks]

CCRL is run by a Russian.

It is not hard to understand why he likes it either. He is wrong of course but at least he made his own mind up.

CCRL is run by a core group of testers. Kirill is responsible for the scripts that produce all our stats.

Have you bothered to ask Kirill his views on Strelka? You might be surprised.
We will not let him express his opinion on behalf of CCRL.

Our main aim in testing Strelka is to gather data, but in saying that, we're not prepared to express a group opinion on the originality or legality of Strelka.
Whether members test Strelka or not is entirely up to them.

Regards, Graham.

[geots]

CCRL is run by a Russian.

It is not hard to understand why he likes it either. He is wrong of course but at least he made his own mind up.

Hell, i didnt know i was Russian.

[Graham Banks]

CCRL is run by a Russian.

It is not hard to understand why he likes it either. He is wrong of course but at least he made his own mind up.

Hell, i didnt know i was Russian.

You learn something new every day George!

[Christopher Conkie]

CCRL is run by a Russian.

It is not hard to understand why he likes it either. He is wrong of course but at least he made his own mind up.

CCRL is run by a core group of testers. Kirill is responsible for the scripts that produce all our stats.

Have you bothered to ask Kirill his views on Strelka? You might be surprised.
We will not let him express his opinion on behalf of CCRL.

Our main aim in testing Strelka is to gather data, but in saying that, we're not prepared to express a group opinion on the originality or legality of Strelka.
Whether members test Strelka or not is entirely up to them.

Regards, Graham.

Banks in "sitting on fence shocker".......

I've read what is in the Kasparov forum from Kirill on Strelka.

The fact is Graham that this was an "I want this to win so then it's not a clone" poll.

Popularity does not make a clone suddenly turn into something original.

By your own standards Rasmussen should still be in the Tour de France because they need to "gather data" on epo.

Do you think Strelka is a clone Graham? Don't you believe the guy who made it when he told you it was one?

Be serious.

[Graham Banks]

Do you think Strelka is a clone Graham? Don't you believe the guy who made it when he told you it was one?

Be serious.

Show me a reliable translation of the Russian message where the Strelka author admits beyond all doubt that he has illegally cloned his engine.

Graham.

[Christopher Conkie]

CCRL is run by a Russian.

It is not hard to understand why he likes it either. He is wrong of course but at least he made his own mind up.

Hell, i didnt know i was Russian.

You learn something new every day George!

Good today is your lucky day then.

http://wferreirajr.googlepages.com/index-en.htm

Come on then.....let's see you test this.....

Something real.

[Christopher Conkie]

Do you think Strelka is a clone Graham? Don't you believe the guy who made it when he told you it was one?

Be serious.

Show me a reliable translation of the Russian message where the Strelka author admits beyond all doubt that he has illegally cloned his engine.

Graham.

http://kasparovchess.crestbook.com/view ... =1869&p=17

Message #844...Point One....

Show me where the GNU license is distributed with Strelka.

And the source code.....? Where's that? And that's just for starters. we have not even got to the Rybka stuff yet.

[Graham Banks]

Do you think Strelka is a clone Graham? Don't you believe the guy who made it when he told you it was one?

Be serious.

Show me a reliable translation of the Russian message where the Strelka author admits beyond all doubt that he has illegally cloned his engine.

Graham.

http://kasparovchess.crestbook.com/view ... =1869&p=17

Message #844...Point One....

Show me where the GNU license is distributed with Strelka.

And the source code.....? Where's that? And that's just for starters. we have not even got to the Rybka stuff yet.

Chris - I can't read Russian. What I'd like to see is a reliable accurate translation that proves that Strelka is an illegally cloned engine.


I'm sure Kirill won't mind me sharing his views on Strelka:

There is no doubt in my mind that Strelka is a clone. The ponder hit statistics in our 40/4 list shows that Strelka is more close to Rybka 1.0 than some Rybka versions to each other. However there is no enough evidence that this was done illegally. We have to be very clear about it, otherwise any person with doubts will be able to remove an engine from our list.

What we know from Osipov (assuming the guy who posted that is really Strelka author, which no one can guarantee either) is:

1. He took Fruit as a basis for Strelka, and re-wrote it to bitboards. Re-writing something is not re-using the code verbatim, so I am not sure GPL is violated. It looks like he reused algorithms. Also those who examined Strelka code did not confirm yet that GPL was violated.

2. He said that he did some statistical tuning of Strelka eval trying to approximate that of Rybka. This is totally acceptable way of making an engine, even if I myself don't see much point in doing that.

3. He said that he took some tables from Rybka. This may be problematic, but so far there is no enough information about it. Vasik keeps silence too.

I also remember the argument about same UCI output in Strelka and Rybka. But Rybka source is closed, so we have to assume that Osipov simply imitated Rybka's interface. This itself is not illegal.

Note that I myself dislike Strelka because even if cloning was legal, the author did not acknowledge his use of Fruit and Rybka.

Hot discussions that appear around Strelka every time show that situation is far from reaching any conclusion. I don't agree with the logic to remove Strelka when there are reasonable doubts. Because the data we provide, like correlation between Strelka and Rybka, may be very useful in resolving the issue. Our "ponder hit" stats show that Strelka plays nearly identical to Rybka 1.0. It is interesting to see at least. Without this data we will only have individual positions posted in the forums (positions evaluated the same by both engines), but someone will also say that there are also positions they evaluate differently. But our ponder hit tells us in more precise way how similar they play to each other.

Please note that we also discuss it a lot within the group. We have to think not only about Strelka, but about setting a precedent for future cases. So we really have to depend on some more sound reasoning than that presented so far.

Regards, Graham.