Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Locked

Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Rybka 4 is a derivative program and should be banned from the WCCC
58
51%
Rybka 4 is an original program and should not be banned from the WCCC
55
49%
 
Total votes: 113

Sean Evans
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: Canada

Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by Sean Evans » Sun Jun 27, 2010 8:58 pm

Hello group,

As Rybka 4 is suspected to be a derivative of the chess program Fruit should it be allowed to play at the WCCC?? As only original works are allowed to play at the WCCC.

http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/t ... php?id=209

Cordially,

Sean

User avatar
M ANSARI
Posts: 3455
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:10 pm

Re: Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by M ANSARI » Sun Jun 27, 2010 9:26 pm

Where do you get that information? Most of the talk of Rybka having anything to do with Fruit was regarding Rybka 1 beta. Since Rybka 3 has been disassembled and its guts are out for everyone to see, I have not heard that it has anything to do with Fruit. I would guess Rybka 4 is even more of a change. If you are posting this to try to get rally support for one of the recent Rybka 3 clones to get treated as an original engine ... good luck with that.

alpha123
Posts: 660
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:13 am
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by alpha123 » Sun Jun 27, 2010 11:40 pm

M ANSARI wrote:Where do you get that information? Most of the talk of Rybka having anything to do with Fruit was regarding Rybka 1 beta. Since Rybka 3 has been disassembled and its guts are out for everyone to see, I have not heard that it has anything to do with Fruit. I would guess Rybka 4 is even more of a change. If you are posting this to try to get rally support for one of the recent Rybka 3 clones to get treated as an original engine ... good luck with that.
If it was in Rybka 1, why wouldn't it be in later Rybkas? Vas certainly rewrote the eval and most likely most/all of the search, but other things (move ordering, UCI parser) are likely unchanged.

Interesting how that argument is extremely applicable to the Ippo issue. Even if (big if) Ippolit contained Rybka code in the beginning, it is all gone by now. So by your standards, IvanHoe, Houdini, Fire, etc are completely legal.

Peter

Hood
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:52 am
Location: Polska, Warszawa

Re: Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by Hood » Mon Jun 28, 2010 1:22 pm

M ANSARI wrote:Where do you get that information? Most of the talk of Rybka having anything to do with Fruit was regarding Rybka 1 beta. Since Rybka 3 has been disassembled and its guts are out for everyone to see, I have not heard that it has anything to do with Fruit. I would guess Rybka 4 is even more of a change. If you are posting this to try to get rally support for one of the recent Rybka 3 clones to get treated as an original engine ... good luck with that.
Has Rybka proven that it is original programm ? :-)
Not. The same as Ippos ;-) .

Not only Rybka will have that problem, look at the White list on OPEN.
Polish National tragedy in Smoleńsk. President and all delegation murdered or killed.
Cui bono ?

There are not bugs free programs.
There are programs with undiscovered bugs.




Ashes to ashes dust to dust. Alleluia.


User avatar
notyetagm
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 2:11 am
Contact:

Re: Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by notyetagm » Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:35 pm

alpha123 wrote:
M ANSARI wrote:Where do you get that information? Most of the talk of Rybka having anything to do with Fruit was regarding Rybka 1 beta. Since Rybka 3 has been disassembled and its guts are out for everyone to see, I have not heard that it has anything to do with Fruit. I would guess Rybka 4 is even more of a change. If you are posting this to try to get rally support for one of the recent Rybka 3 clones to get treated as an original engine ... good luck with that.
If it was in Rybka 1, why wouldn't it be in later Rybkas? Vas certainly rewrote the eval and most likely most/all of the search, but other things (move ordering, UCI parser) are likely unchanged.

Interesting how that argument is extremely applicable to the Ippo issue. Even if (big if) Ippolit contained Rybka code in the beginning, it is all gone by now. So by your standards, IvanHoe, Houdini, Fire, etc are completely legal.

Peter
Don't you just love it when the Rybka supporters get all outraged when you point out that, basically,

Code: Select all

Fruit + bitboards + speed optimization = Rybka 1
?

:D

User avatar
notyetagm
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 2:11 am
Contact:

Re: Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by notyetagm » Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:39 pm

M ANSARI wrote:Where do you get that information? Most of the talk of Rybka having anything to do with Fruit was regarding Rybka 1 beta. Since Rybka 3 has been disassembled and its guts are out for everyone to see, I have not heard that it has anything to do with Fruit. I would guess Rybka 4 is even more of a change. If you are posting this to try to get rally support for one of the recent Rybka 3 clones to get treated as an original engine ... good luck with that.
Search for the paper published several months ago on this board. The author presented overwhelming evidence that

Code: Select all

Fruit + bitboards + speed optimimzations = Rybka 1.
Which means that Rybka should not be eligible for the WCCC since it is provably a derivative of Fruit.

alpha123
Posts: 660
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:13 am
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by alpha123 » Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:54 pm

I did not vote, because I believe that Rybka is derived from Fruit, but I think it should be allowed in the WCCC. (I'm sympathetic for Vas, for whatever reason.) Fabien didn't seem to care about the Fruit/Rybka thing, but the FSF now owns the Fruit 2.1 copyright, so I guess it's their decision. (I know what that will be.... *preparing for anti-Rybka campaign.....* :roll: :lol:)

Peter

Sean Evans
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by Sean Evans » Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:48 pm

http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/f ... s-2010.pdf

18th WORLD COMPUTER CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT RULES

2. Each program must be the original work of the entering developers. Programming teams whose code is derived from or including game-playing code written by others must name all other authors, or the source of such code, in the details of their submission form. Programs which are discovered to be close derivatives of others (e.g., by playing nearly all moves the same), may be declared invalid by the Tournament Director after seeking expert advice. For this purpose a listing of all game-related code running on the system must be available on demand to the Tournament Director.

Shaun
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:55 pm
Location: Brighton - UK
Contact:

Re: Whether Rybka 4 Should Be Allowed To Play At the WCCC?

Post by Shaun » Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:56 pm

I still have not seen any evidence that R1 was derived from Fruit...

The link most people seem to make is...

R1 -> Strelka (Vas claimed Strelka was a clone) -> Strelka contained Fruit code -> R1 contains Fruit code...

However my understanding from the likes of DC was that Strelka was a Fruit shell, with some other engine bits plus code from a decompiled Rybka 1. When Vas claimed Strelka was a clone of R1 he did not mean Strelka was an exact copy, which it is not.

Fabien, the author of Fruit saw no issue with Rybka, his view was that some ideas had been taken... and nothing wrong with that.

Also this R1 = a bitboard Fruit rubbish - if it was that simple Rybka would have been caught by all the other Fuit -> bitboard conversions...

Shaun

P.S. Perhaps I have missed* something but I really believe that Rybka was/is less fruity than the now, sadly, common belief.

* any real fact seem swamped but the number of obvious flawed assumptions and miss quotes, recently I even saw a post claiming Vas had admitted that R1 was 20% Fruit code, any attempt to correct the miss quote was burried in other posts.

Please note these are my personal views and I am not speaking on behalf or CCRL.

Locked