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.
bob
Posts: 20918
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by bob » Mon Feb 14, 2011 11:27 pm

Rolf wrote:
bob wrote:
Rolf wrote:

What sense do you see in testing if the best program is playing with reduced strength so that it doesnt invite the cloners to steal.
I am not sure what you mean there. What program intentionally plays worse than it could play???
The author decided to throw R4 not with the optimal strength, because it would be stlen (decompiled) by your allies. I read that already bugs weaken a program. Now the cluster Rybka gets full strength. What's your comment?
A succinct one; "bullshit".

I see that I must move the schedule for my examins. It's too complex. I hope that the young or old silent readers could profit from the way you answered my questions. Just tell us how many of your students are interested in computerchess?
Not many, other that to follow how Crafty does...

User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9772
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb » Mon Feb 14, 2011 11:46 pm

bob wrote:
Rolf wrote:
bob wrote:
Rolf wrote:

What sense do you see in testing if the best program is playing with reduced strength so that it doesnt invite the cloners to steal.
I am not sure what you mean there. What program intentionally plays worse than it could play???
The author decided to throw R4 not with the optimal strength, because it would be stlen (decompiled) by your allies. I read that already bugs weaken a program. Now the cluster Rybka gets full strength. What's your comment?
A succinct one; "bullshit".

I see that I must move the schedule for my examins. It's too complex. I hope that the young or old silent readers could profit from the way you answered my questions. Just tell us how many of your students are interested in computerchess?
Not many, other that to follow how Crafty does...
Excellent answer Bob :D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….

Michael Sherwin
Posts: 3196
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 1:00 am
Location: WY, USA
Full name: Michael Sherwin

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by Michael Sherwin » Wed Feb 16, 2011 10:37 am

bob wrote:
My take on ip* and _all_ of its cousins.

This thing is clearly reverse-engineered as a starting point. The code is unlike anything any human would ever produce. Even someone that has been doing optimization work for years would simply not write code that looks like that. IMHO, there is absolutely no doubt but that it started from reverse-engineering.
There is a major problem with this assumption that invalidates it completely as evidence until a claim by its secondary author(s) has been proved or disproved.

The claim by its secondary author(s) is that the original program was written by the original author in Russian_Chess_Language 'b' code. If this is true then a likely assumption is that the 'b' compiler outputs 'C' code that would look like it came from reverse engineering.

Both assumptions are just as invalid until the prior claim has been dealt with. However, until it has been dealt with one is more correct to take the word of the secondary authors and proceed as though the 'C' source came from a higher level compiler. If this is not acceptable then one should address the previous claim adequately before hand to avoid publishing a potentially erroneous and damaging conclusion as undeniable fact.
If you are on a sidewalk and the covid goes beep beep
Just step aside or you might have a bit of heat
Covid covid runs through the town all day
Can the people ever change their ways
Sherwin the covid's after you
Sherwin if it catches you you're through

rlsuth
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:37 pm

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by rlsuth » Sun Feb 20, 2011 6:55 pm

Imagine if car manufacturers never learned anything from other car manufacturers? It's just not plausible to think that chess engine authors wont try to learn from other chess program authors. As long as it's only the idea they learn and then create a unique implementation, I have no problem with it. If their program is stronger for it, that's good.

User avatar
michiguel
Posts: 6401
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
Contact:

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by michiguel » Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:51 pm

rlsuth wrote:Imagine if car manufacturers never learned anything from other car manufacturers? It's just not plausible to think that chess engine authors wont try to learn from other chess program authors. As long as it's only the idea they learn and then create a unique implementation, I have no problem with it. If their program is stronger for it, that's good.
Do you realize that learn is not the same as copy?

Miguel

rlsuth
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:37 pm

Re: What the computer chess community needs to decide

Post by rlsuth » Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:57 pm

michiguel wrote:
rlsuth wrote:Imagine if car manufacturers never learned anything from other car manufacturers? It's just not plausible to think that chess engine authors wont try to learn from other chess program authors. As long as it's only the idea they learn and then create a unique implementation, I have no problem with it. If their program is stronger for it, that's good.
Do you realize that learn is not the same as copy?

Miguel


Do you realize that I'm talking about learning and not copying?


Learning and copying are not necessarily mutually exclusive anyway. In the analogy of a car, other manufacturers learned what worked and then copied the idea.

You might be getting confused with copying and plagiarism though. In the case of Rybka, Vas said he read through the Fruit code and then coded his own program based on what he learned. That's not plagiarism, but it is copying, and learning.

Post Reply