Why don't strong engines enter WCCC?

[vittyvirus]

Improving Fruit by 400+ elo that time sounds as weird as is like improving Stockfish to 3700 and at the same time changing its move representation system.

I don't know why I have to tell this:
ITS NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE!

And if someone improves SF to 3700, more engines with elo ~3400-3600 would come out and want to defeat SF! That time it would be easy for any serious engine programmer to get his engine to 3100+, wouldn't it?

I'm just using SF as an example.

P.S. Rybka might have taken some ideas from Fruit, but it had many original ideas, and at least was NOT a Fruit clone.

[Uri Blass]

I believe that many authors do not copy and take code from others(note that there is a difference between taking code and learning and taking ideas).

Uri

Hmm...I did not know that )))

Btw,
I think Movei is created via copying, right ?


1)I started by copying some names of variables and name of functions from tscp but at that point
I had no working code(only variables and empty functions and few arrays when I needed to add code for it).

For more details:
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... =&start=40

1)I will not say that Movei is created via copying.
Most of the code of movei is certainly not in other engines and
I did not start from the code or from most of the code of some chess program.

2)tscp has not the same status as fruit or stockfish (it is not GPL) and it is clearly legal to start from it and make the program close source if you do enough changes and get the permission of the author.

I did not start with tscp and the author of tscp has no objection to what I did so it certainly does not create a legal problem unlike using fruit's code or stockfish's code.

[Sedat Canbaz]

You just should not be surprised that hardly anyone takes you serious here

One thing more,

Are you sure ??

Believe me,
SedatChess site statistics do not confirm your funny comments!!

I think there are a lot of interest to my chess activities !
-And here are some of them, where many many people benefit:
-Using Perfect opening books (thousands of users)
-SCCT Engine Rating Lists
-SCCT Book Tournaments
-SCCT Engine Tournaments
-SedatChess benchmarks (includes many various hardwares)
etc...

To be sure I am right or not... check the below links please
And I hope you will have fun during reading )) !!:
http://i.hizliresim.com/wvvmpm.gif
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=10030
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... =&start=10

And next time please think 7 (seven) times before to underestimate my activities!!))

Btw,
Any news about Winboard GUI, will be a new release ?
Where the UCI engines will be capable to play without adapters ?? ))

[Modern Times]

I believe that many authors do not copy and take code from others (note that there is a difference between taking code and learning and taking ideas).
Uri

The thing is we just don't know who does what, and therefore we don't know whether particular engines are "original" or "derivatives". There could be many undiscovered "derivatives" out there. And there is also no firm definition of these terms.

Note that I am not convinced that Vas took code from fruit.

As I said earlier, there are some very respected and experienced people out there that are not sure that the ICGA case was proven, and you are certainly one of them.

I am sure that he learned from fruit and took ideas and I am sure that every programmer of top programs learn from the code of the best free programs and take ideas from them.
Uri

That is surely the case, and the question is, did they take more than just ideas ? We don't know. That is why I treat all engines equally. It is wrong to label engines when the facts are not known, or in dispute as with the Ryba example.

[Sedat Canbaz]

1)I started by copying some names of variables and name of functions from tscp but at that point
I had no working code(only variables and empty functions and few arrays when I needed to add code for it).

1)I will not say that Movei is created via copying.
Most of the code of movei is certainly not in other engines and
I did not start from the code or from most of the code of some chess program.

2)tscp has not the same status as fruit or stockfish (it is not GPL) and it is clearly legal to start from it and make the program close source if you do enough changes and get the permission of the author.

I did not start with tscp and the author of tscp has no objection to what I did so it certainly does not create a legal problem unlike using fruit's code or stockfish's code.

Thanks for your clarification....

I know that you very honest programer!

Btw, It seems you learned some ideas exception TSCP, also from Fruit, right ?

sim version 3
------ Fruit 2.1 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0) ------
78.87 Loop 13.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
74.79 Gambit Fruit 1.0 Beta 4bx (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
73.56 Deep Onno 1-2-70 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.84 Alaric 707 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.60 ECE 11.01 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.06 Toga II 1.3x4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
67.72 Strelka 2.0 B (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
67.70 Belka 2.0.0 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
63.73 GarboChess v2.20 x86 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
63.55 Naum 4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
62.21 Rotor 0.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.94 Cyclone 1.0 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.88 Daydreamer 1.75 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.86 N2 0.4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.77 Twisted Logic 20080404x (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
59.65 Pupsi2 v0.08 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
59.47 Glaurung 2-epsilon/5 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.85 Stockfish 1.4 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.80 Ayito 0.2.994 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.57 Atlas 2.90 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.34 Umko 1.2 i686 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.08 Gull 1.0a (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
57.26 Komodo32 1.0 JA (Doch32) (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.76 Doch32 1.2 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.58 Murka 2 w32 UCI (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.34 Atlas 3.14b (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.28 Philou Version 3.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.19 Naum 4 (depth: 3, scale: 1.0)
55.84 bright-0.2c (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
55.73 Movei00_8_438 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)

[vittyvirus]

That is surely the case, and the question is, did they take more than just ideas ? We don't know. That is why I treat all engines equally. It is wrong to label engines when the facts are not known, or in dispute as with the Ryba example.

+1

[Sedat Canbaz]

Improving Fruit by 400+ elo that time sounds as weird as is like improving Stockfish to 3700 and at the same time changing its move representation system.

I don't know why I have to tell this:
ITS NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE!

And if someone improves SF to 3700, more engines with elo ~3400-3600 would come out and want to defeat SF! That time it would be easy for any serious engine programmer to get his engine to 3100+, wouldn't it?

I'm just using SF as an example.

P.S. Rybka might have taken some ideas from Fruit, but it had many original ideas, and at least was NOT a Fruit clone.

Very good points !!!

You are reading my thoughts !! well-done Syed !

Btw,
The 'good' always is trying to be stoned...
But in the end: the 'good' always wins !!



Best,
Sedat

[hgm]

Are you sure ??

Believe me,
SedatChess site statistics do not confirm your funny comments!!

Now what has web-view stats to do with anything? For all we know people just get there to have a good laugh. I am sure there are many top comedians that have websites that get more hits than yours.

OK, so perhaps you are a good book builder, I cannot judge that. But that thousands of people use your book doesn't make you an expert on what engine programmers do. Even if millions of people would use your book it doesn't make you knowledgeable about that. It is just totally irellevant.

And remarks like "I don't care too much about what programmers say about programming matters, because I have my own view" are pretty efficient in destroying your credibility.

Any news about Winboard GUI, will be a new release ?
Where the UCI engines will be capable to play without adapters ?? ))

Now what does WinBoard have to do with the originality of engines or WCCC participation? Why mention it at all (other than to advertize to the World that you are a slow learner)?

[Uri Blass]

1)I started by copying some names of variables and name of functions from tscp but at that point
I had no working code(only variables and empty functions and few arrays when I needed to add code for it).

1)I will not say that Movei is created via copying.
Most of the code of movei is certainly not in other engines and
I did not start from the code or from most of the code of some chess program.

2)tscp has not the same status as fruit or stockfish (it is not GPL) and it is clearly legal to start from it and make the program close source if you do enough changes and get the permission of the author.

I did not start with tscp and the author of tscp has no objection to what I did so it certainly does not create a legal problem unlike using fruit's code or stockfish's code.

Thanks for your clarification....

I know that you very honest programer!

Btw, It seems you learned some ideas exception TSCP, also from Fruit, right ?

sim version 3
------ Fruit 2.1 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0) ------
78.87 Loop 13.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
74.79 Gambit Fruit 1.0 Beta 4bx (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
73.56 Deep Onno 1-2-70 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.84 Alaric 707 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.60 ECE 11.01 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.06 Toga II 1.3x4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
67.72 Strelka 2.0 B (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
67.70 Belka 2.0.0 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
63.73 GarboChess v2.20 x86 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
63.55 Naum 4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
62.21 Rotor 0.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.94 Cyclone 1.0 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.88 Daydreamer 1.75 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.86 N2 0.4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.77 Twisted Logic 20080404x (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
59.65 Pupsi2 v0.08 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
59.47 Glaurung 2-epsilon/5 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.85 Stockfish 1.4 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.80 Ayito 0.2.994 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.57 Atlas 2.90 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.34 Umko 1.2 i686 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.08 Gull 1.0a (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
57.26 Komodo32 1.0 JA (Doch32) (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.76 Doch32 1.2 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.58 Murka 2 w32 UCI (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.34 Atlas 3.14b (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.28 Philou Version 3.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.19 Naum 4 (depth: 3, scale: 1.0)
55.84 bright-0.2c (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
55.73 Movei00_8_438 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)

Yes I learned ideas from the evaluation function of fruit but I did not copy and paste code from fruit(I had to translate things that I understood to movei's data structure so I could not use copy and paste).

Edit:I also did not copy the exact mathematical formula that is in fruit but only used some ideas(for example I learned from fruit that it is better to have bigger weight for mobility of knight and bishops relative to rooks or queens when early version of movei simply counted possible moves in the mobility's evaluation and a move of a bishop got the same weight as a move of a queen in the mobility's evaluation).

I practically used smaller weights relative to fruit because using the same weights as fruit was too much considering the rest of my evaluation function.

[vittyvirus]

1)I started by copying some names of variables and name of functions from tscp but at that point
I had no working code(only variables and empty functions and few arrays when I needed to add code for it).

1)I will not say that Movei is created via copying.
Most of the code of movei is certainly not in other engines and
I did not start from the code or from most of the code of some chess program.

2)tscp has not the same status as fruit or stockfish (it is not GPL) and it is clearly legal to start from it and make the program close source if you do enough changes and get the permission of the author.

I did not start with tscp and the author of tscp has no objection to what I did so it certainly does not create a legal problem unlike using fruit's code or stockfish's code.

Thanks for your clarification....

I know that you very honest programer!

Btw, It seems you learned some ideas exception TSCP, also from Fruit, right ?

sim version 3
------ Fruit 2.1 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0) ------
78.87 Loop 13.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
74.79 Gambit Fruit 1.0 Beta 4bx (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
73.56 Deep Onno 1-2-70 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.84 Alaric 707 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.60 ECE 11.01 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
68.06 Toga II 1.3x4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
67.72 Strelka 2.0 B (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
67.70 Belka 2.0.0 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
63.73 GarboChess v2.20 x86 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
63.55 Naum 4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
62.21 Rotor 0.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.94 Cyclone 1.0 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.88 Daydreamer 1.75 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.86 N2 0.4 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
61.77 Twisted Logic 20080404x (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
59.65 Pupsi2 v0.08 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
59.47 Glaurung 2-epsilon/5 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.85 Stockfish 1.4 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.80 Ayito 0.2.994 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.57 Atlas 2.90 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.34 Umko 1.2 i686 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
58.08 Gull 1.0a (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
57.26 Komodo32 1.0 JA (Doch32) (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.76 Doch32 1.2 JA (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.58 Murka 2 w32 UCI (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.34 Atlas 3.14b (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.28 Philou Version 3.6 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
56.19 Naum 4 (depth: 3, scale: 1.0)
55.84 bright-0.2c (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)
55.73 Movei00_8_438 (depth: 2, scale: 1.0)

Yes I learned ideas from the evaluation function of fruit but I did not copy and paste code from fruit(I had to translate things that I understood to movei's data structure so I could not use copy and paste).

That's what everyone does, and I'm sure that's what Vas did too!
I used Crafty and Fruit while writing my movegen (although my code is pretty different from them).
P.S You did it good, and so did Vas. I've learned HTML and CSS by reading source of many websites. I got many new tags too. Did I copy code?