What the computer chess community needs to decide

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

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, bob, hgm

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
User avatar
Don
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:27 pm

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by Don » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:14 pm

fern wrote:I believe that If an engine is based -how much heavy is heavily?- on another engine with no legal problems as effect of that AND the guy say he has made such use of another guy code, it is ethically acceptable.
If the supposed author try to pass as one, enterily original author, there we have a lier.
An engine that has made legal use of another code and is recognized as such, the i take it like a variant, an improvemente perhaps and I see no problem on that.

Fern
I think we need to decide if people are more important, or ELO ratings.

If you love computer chess, you need to also respect the dignity and incredible hard work of the people who provide you with these programs - and in my view that is the real travesty here.

frcha
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 4:47 pm
Contact:

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by frcha » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:22 pm

Don wrote:
fern wrote:I believe that If an engine is based -how much heavy is heavily?- on another engine with no legal problems as effect of that AND the guy say he has made such use of another guy code, it is ethically acceptable.
If the supposed author try to pass as one, enterily original author, there we have a lier.
An engine that has made legal use of another code and is recognized as such, the i take it like a variant, an improvemente perhaps and I see no problem on that.

Fern
I think we need to decide if people are more important, or ELO ratings.

If you love computer chess, you need to also respect the dignity and incredible hard work of the people who provide you with these programs - and in my view that is the real travesty here.
You know what would be a good idea then --

Provide an explanation of what a derivative is - and
Create a list of all derivatives -- + description of how much is derived in that particular derivative version vs how much could be considered original.

- in that way someone could see their favorite engine listed there and wonder why -- and be instantly informed.

Of course we cannot change anyone's opinion if their mind is made up but we can inform people of every engine ...and this is becoming increasingly important .

The person(s) creating that list have to be very experienced Chess engine programmers - and they should reach some consensus

User avatar
Don
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:27 pm

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by Don » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:42 pm

playjunior wrote: Could you? Say, take Stockfish and improve it by 50 points within a month. Wouldn't this be a wonderful contribution? You take it add +50, then the other top-10 guy takes over from you and so on. Within a year we would have +500 ELO from where we started!
I don't know for sure whether I could do it in a month, but yes, I could add 50 ELO and more.
Robert Houdart could too, Robert Hyatt could, just about any of the top 20 program authors could do this.

Stockfish started out as Glaurung with contributions from other talented programmers. It's the same principle. How much did they add to an already existing strong program?

Of course as the program gets stronger, it becomes more difficult. I could add 500 ELO to a weak program, but not to a strong program.

It does not work in linear fashion as you seem to think. If I added 50 ELO, someone else could add 40 to that and then a third person might add 20, etc.

Of course with time every program that is under active development improves. My hope is to get above Houdini (without cheating) but that's a tall order.

Jason Konopka
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Charlottesville, VA

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by Jason Konopka » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:50 pm

Continuing your same train of thought, do you believe that Rybka, as it is presently known (i.e. the current version, NOT versions 1.x) should be allowed in tournaments?

paulo
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by paulo » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:50 pm

Don wrote: I don't know for sure whether I could do it in a month, but yes, I could add 50 ELO and more.
Robert Houdart could too, Robert Hyatt could, just about any of the top 20 program authors could do this.
Are you sure? Do you know Robert? In what basis do you say that besides considering yourself one of the top 20 program author?

Getting hilarious.
LOLLL :D

jdart
Posts: 4014
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 4:23 am
Location: http://www.arasanchess.org

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by jdart » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:58 pm

I just can't make myself care as much as some people apparently do about this.

Legally, if ippolit is an unauthorized reverse-engineering effort, then its author(s) and distributors could be liable for legal damages (emphasis on "could be" because the outcome of any legal action is not certain).

Ippolit does look like something reverse-engineered to me.

But even if it is - how much is original vs. copied? I don't know. Plus, if it were closed source, would you even know anything about its origins?

Similarly if Rybka made unauthorized (by GPL) use of Fruit code, its authors could be liable. But if nobody prosecutes (which does, after all, take time and money to do) then they are just going to go on as usual. They could decide to settle with Fabien (i.e. pay for a license) and if I were them I'd consider that, just to remove future headaches. But if they don't .. so be it. I doubt Rybka 4 is very similar to Fruit in terms of how it behaves, whatever internal similarities there might be.

And in any case, there is no "unpublishing" something that is already widely distributed. If you want to ignore these programs, or ban them from events, that can be done, but they'll still be in circulation. It's just a fact of life.

I don't personally care if Rybka enters competitions. In fact, I'd like them to. I'm less certain about Ippolit etc. because their origins look clearly fishy to me and if Larry Kaufman is to be believed, they act like their parent, as well as look like it.

But in general I'm not at all sure I'm comfortable with the community deciding anything about the whole mess. We aren't a judge or jury. If a judge or jury does gets involved, then we can get some conclusion to it all. But otherwise I'm not eager to step in and make calls.

stevenaaus
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by stevenaaus » Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:04 pm

Don wrote:We need to address this issue because it's a matter of whether we want diversity or not. Do we really want a dozen incestuous programs that are basically alike give or take 50 ELO or do we want a variety of programs with different playing styles and strengths?
Hmm... in some ways there is no question of choice, it's simply an environment driven by achievement. Since chess is a game with a "winner" and a "loser", the focus will generally be on the fastest engines regardless of their origin. Personally, I'm quite happy playing against Rex, Haundrix amd Knightcap.

As regards computer analysis - people will also generally use the strongest program. Though one place where much can still be achieved is in removing computer's inability to see drawn positions, though it's certainly not trivial.

User avatar
Don
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:27 pm

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by Don » Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:09 pm

paulo wrote:
Don wrote: I don't know for sure whether I could do it in a month, but yes, I could add 50 ELO and more.
Robert Houdart could too, Robert Hyatt could, just about any of the top 20 program authors could do this.
Are you sure? Do you know Robert? In what basis do you say that besides considering yourself one of the top 20 program author?
I picked top 20 off the top of my head, it's probably a lot more than 20 because many very fine programs are even in the top 20.

The reason I feel this way is that each person can contribute fresh and original ideas and provides a unique perspective. I have a bag of my own tricks not used in Robbolito or stockfish and any other top programmer can probably say the same thing.

Even without this consideration I continue to improve Komodo and other programmers (who are actively developing) continue to improve their programs too. So it's more a matter of where you start from than how much you can get.

Naturally there is a point of diminishing returns but it may be farther away than we think. It may be the case that even programs such as Houdini are well off the mark and some future programmer will consider it very weak and old fashioned - in the same way we can laugh at programs that are only 10 years old. They were cutting edge at the time, but by todays standards they are pretty lame.

Getting hilarious.
LOLLL :D

Christopher Conkie
Posts: 6073
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 7:34 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by Christopher Conkie » Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:12 pm

paulo wrote:
Don wrote: I don't know for sure whether I could do it in a month, but yes, I could add 50 ELO and more.
Robert Houdart could too, Robert Hyatt could, just about any of the top 20 program authors could do this.
Are you sure? Do you know Robert? In what basis do you say that besides considering yourself one of the top 20 program author?

Getting hilarious.
LOLLL :D

On the basis that Houdini is a complete copy of Robbolito.

I thought you might have worked that out by now.

It is hilarious that you seem unable to.......

paulo
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by paulo » Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:18 pm

Christopher Conkie wrote:
paulo wrote:
Don wrote: I don't know for sure whether I could do it in a month, but yes, I could add 50 ELO and more.
Robert Houdart could too, Robert Hyatt could, just about any of the top 20 program authors could do this.
Are you sure? Do you know Robert? In what basis do you say that besides considering yourself one of the top 20 program author?

Getting hilarious.
LOLLL :D

On the basis that Houdini is a complete copy of Robbolito.

I thought you might have worked that out by now.

It is hilarious that you seem unable to.......
Nice, a complete copy of Robbolito +100 Elo above R4. Amazing copy.
Please don't be ridiculous.

Post Reply