TCEC - Is it okay to have a derivative program as champion?

[Henk]

Isabella when can I expect inquisition ?

[shrapnel]

TCEC: Is it okay to have a derivative program as champion?

I suppose that's a swipe at Houdart.
Why don't YOU do it, if it's so easy ?
WHY are people so jealous of him ??
Disgusting.

[matthewlai]

TCEC: Is it okay to have a derivative program as champion?

Yes, as long as it's a legal derivative. For example, Stockfish is a legal derivative of Glaurung (it followed the licensing terms of Glaurung). "Derivative" really shouldn't have the negative connotation that it seems to have in this community. They are perfectly fine as long as they are legal.

That, in my opinion, is the absolute minimum requirement. We don't want to encourage illegal derivatives, no matter how much stronger they are, or how different they are.

Now, to make the tournament more interesting, it may make sense to introduce additional limitations (eg. how different they are to the original), so that we won't have 10 legal derivatives of Stockfish that are only slightly different. But that's just to make things more interesting.

[corres]

[quote="Guenther"]
IMO this attitude which tries to belittle stupid cloning and stupid derivating (yes this exists too!) is the main reason why it gets worse and worse.[/quote]
Pleasae, let's suppose that there is a very expert programmer who knows the rule of chess but who have not seen any bytes from a source code of chess program and who have not read any technical description of a chess program.
What do you think, how many years he needs to make a chess engine with -let's speak- 2000 of Elo???
A very old sentence said "We all are standing on the shoulder of our ancestor".
Btw. The very expert programmer is using such a program language and such a compiler what were created by others - we do not talk about the origin of his PC.

[Guenther]

IMO this attitude which tries to belittle stupid cloning and stupid derivating (yes this exists too!) is the main reason why it gets worse and worse.

Pleasae, let's suppose that there is a very expert programmer who knows the rule of chess but who have not seen any bytes from a source code of chess program and who have not read any technical description of a chess program.
What do you think, how many years he needs to make a chess engine with -let's speak- 2000 of Elo???
A very old sentence said "We all are standing on the shoulder of our ancestor".
Btw. The very expert programmer is using such a program language and such a compiler what were created by others - we do not talk about the origin of his PC.

Don't change the content and please quote right.

It was all about percentages (99/100) and copying.

BTW that platitude ' we are standing on the shoulders of our ancestors' is another cheapo w/o real meaning
in this context and no one talked about compilers and programming languages, because it is irrelevant...

[MikeB]

TCEC: Is it okay to have a derivative program as champion?

Well Sean - I responded yes. But if it was up to me ( and thank goodness it is not), I would have a preliminary derivative only round, before the main round, where all entrants MUST be legal derivatives i.e., they provide their modified source and the winner , and only the winner, of the preliminary round would gain entrance to the main tournament, So out of, say 64 engines in the main tournament, I would be ok with ONE derivative.

[corres]

[quote="Guenther"]
Don't change the content and please quote right.

It was all about percentages ([b]99/100[/b]) and [b]copying[/b].

BTW that platitude ' we are standing on the shoulders of our ancestors' is another cheapo w/o real meaning
in this context and no one talked about compilers and programming languages, because it is irrelevant...[/quote]

You have not answered to my question (..how many years..).
The sentence "We all are standing..." is not a cheap platitude but but it is the reality even if it is heavy to accept certain peoples.
With the mention of program language, compiler, PC I only refer to the facts that when we work on something we use not only our knowledge and our idea but a lot of things created by others.
Naturally the operative rules have to be kept by all chess programmers, too.

[Dirt]

TCEC: Is it okay to have a derivative program as champion?

Yes, as long as it's a legal derivative. For example, Stockfish is a legal derivative of Glaurung (it followed the licensing terms of Glaurung). "Derivative" really shouldn't have the negative connotation that it seems to have in this community. They are perfectly fine as long as they are legal.

That, in my opinion, is the absolute minimum requirement. We don't want to encourage illegal derivatives, no matter how much stronger they are, or how different they are.

Now, to make the tournament more interesting, it may make sense to introduce additional limitations (eg. how different they are to the original), so that we won't have 10 legal derivatives of Stockfish that are only slightly different. But that's just to make things more interesting.

Do you really want to charge TCEC (or whoever runs a tournament) with determining the legality of a program? That sounds like a job for the courts to me.

[mjlef]

TCEC: Is it okay to have a derivative program as champion?

Yes, as long as it's a legal derivative. For example, Stockfish is a legal derivative of Glaurung (it followed the licensing terms of Glaurung). "Derivative" really shouldn't have the negative connotation that it seems to have in this community. They are perfectly fine as long as they are legal.

That, in my opinion, is the absolute minimum requirement. We don't want to encourage illegal derivatives, no matter how much stronger they are, or how different they are.

Now, to make the tournament more interesting, it may make sense to introduce additional limitations (eg. how different they are to the original), so that we won't have 10 legal derivatives of Stockfish that are only slightly different. But that's just to make things more interesting.

Do you really want to charge TCEC (or whoever runs a tournament) with determining the legality of a program? That sounds like a job for the courts to me.

Courts decide legalities. But tournament runners want to play fair. Lets say I made 100 versions of Komodo, each with a tiny change which might modify the playing strength by say 1 elo. I enter all 100 copies in TCEC under different names. If they all play against 1 Stockfish, then one of my clones has a much greater chance of winning than the single Stockfish. Some will do better than others. And that would be unfair. So tournament runners need to keep this from happening, whether the clone is legal or not. In past World Microcomputer Championships, both Fidelity and Mephisto actually entered identical copies to increase winning chances (they did not hide this fact, and it was fine by the rules at the time).

In just the last few years, I have seen at least two programs which were stolen versions of Komodo, another that was stolen Gull, and another that was stolen Stockfish. The Komodo thieves put some kind of wrapper around the stolen Komodo versions, but it was easily found out due to the moves it played. For the Gull and Stockfish clones, they seem to have just modified the name in the source code and recompiled.

[bob]

TCEC: Is it okay to have a derivative program as champion?

Yes, as long as it's a legal derivative. For example, Stockfish is a legal derivative of Glaurung (it followed the licensing terms of Glaurung). "Derivative" really shouldn't have the negative connotation that it seems to have in this community. They are perfectly fine as long as they are legal.

That, in my opinion, is the absolute minimum requirement. We don't want to encourage illegal derivatives, no matter how much stronger they are, or how different they are.

Now, to make the tournament more interesting, it may make sense to introduce additional limitations (eg. how different they are to the original), so that we won't have 10 legal derivatives of Stockfish that are only slightly different. But that's just to make things more interesting.

I don't think calling stockfish a derivative is correct. BOTH programs have the same author. They simply represent a name-change, nothing more. ALL programs evolve over time, naturally. Toga was a derivative of fruit, in contrast. Different authors.

Would you call Crafty a derivative of Cray Blitz when I wrote both?