WCCC Is Better Than CCT

[Dann Corbit]

WCCC Is Better Than CCT

In CCT, all the games were played through the internet, so it's difficult to prevent cheating in the match. In other words, You can use any engine while playing.

In WCCC, it's totally different! Every engine's copyright shall be checked up by the auditor firstly. And no one can cheat.

So, I am afraid to say that the result of CCT said nothing.

There has been cheating at WCCC.
There has not been cheating at CCT.
So my conclusion is the opposite of yours.

[Ben Lau]

Moreover in the WCCC is just as easy or more cheating because there are programs that also play remotely.

I don't think so, as the word "remote" may have different meanings.

In WCCC, "remote" means "remote desktop", under remote desktop you can control the remote machine just like controlling the local machine with full administrator's privilege。

So it's impossible to cheat. Even if the "remote control software" is suspicious, the WCCC auditor also can use other reliable "remote control" softwares to access the same remote machine to verify.

[bob]

WCCC Is Better Than CCT

In CCT, all the games were played through the internet, so it's difficult to prevent cheating in the match. In other words, You can use any engine while playing.

In WCCC, it's totally different! Every engine's copyright shall be checked up by the auditor firstly. And no one can cheat.

So, I am afraid to say that the result of CCT said nothing.

Sorry but that shows naive thinking. We have had cheating in human vs human events, human vs computer events, and computer vs computer events, since they started. There is absolutely no way to eliminate cheating unless you have a lot of money and can somehow find people to handle things that are 100% trustworthy. Since that latter is not possible, cheating is just a part of the equation that will always be present. It is no worse or better in WCCC events than in ICC events...

[Ryan Benitez]

Fruit and Chess64 are completely different chess engines, this has been pointed out many times...in case you didn't know.

What is more different?
Chess64 = bitboard
Fruit = bitboard
new eval in Chess64
big eval changes in Fruit
or
Toga which is very near to Fruit 2.1 which is from 2005/06/17

looks like double standards.

Thomas

To clarify yes Fruit and Chess64 are both bitboard engines but are not at all influenced by eachother with the implementation. Yes Fruit does have a rewritten eval but is not the same a Chess64’s eval that is also not the same as Fruit2.1 or any derivatives. Because Fruit and Chess64 do not have code in common and even intentionally do some thing is different ways to test different theories I see no reason the 2 programs would not be treated as different.
Now about Toga, the first thing is that a TD not knowing about what has changed in Fruit may consider both Fruit and Toga to be versions of Fruit 2.1. This is an issue that would take some convincing but is possible to get across of course. The more important issue is not that Toga is based on Fruit but that it is a GPL engine. Don’t get me wrong I am very pro GPL and think it is great but I often wonder how tournaments will have to treat GPL engines in the long run. Because of the intent of the GPL every GPL engine has the right to use any code in another GPL engine. In this way cloning is encouraged and very much legal under the GPL. I am surprised that we have not run into a problem yet with tournament rules and GPL rules conflicting. I think to exclude all GPL engines would be unfortunate so what is the solution? Should only GPL engines that do not utilize other GPL engines or derive from other GPL engines be accepted in tournaments? If so to what extent and who judges? The issue is complicated and I don’t have the solution and doubt we can get everyone to agree on a reasonable solution any time soon. Anyway I see no double standard issue here.

Ryan

[Zach Wegner]

To clarify yes Fruit and Chess64 are both bitboard engines but are not at all influenced by eachother with the implementation. Yes Fruit does have a rewritten eval but is not the same a Chess64’s eval that is also not the same as Fruit2.1 or any derivatives.

Yes, I've heard about this, very interesting. I remember hearing that Chess64 has a very efficient parallel algorithm. Care to discuss any details, if you have any? Also, what language is Chess64 in, because I (once again) remember hearing that Fabien wanted to write a program in Ada or another language?

Because Fruit and Chess64 do not have code in common and even intentionally do some thing is different ways to test different theories I see no reason the 2 programs would not be treated as different.
Now about Toga, the first thing is that a TD not knowing about what has changed in Fruit may consider both Fruit and Toga to be versions of Fruit 2.1. This is an issue that would take some convincing but is possible to get across of course. The more important issue is not that Toga is based on Fruit but that it is a GPL engine. Don’t get me wrong I am very pro GPL and think it is great but I often wonder how tournaments will have to treat GPL engines in the long run. Because of the intent of the GPL every GPL engine has the right to use any code in another GPL engine. In this way cloning is encouraged and very much legal under the GPL. I am surprised that we have not run into a problem yet with tournament rules and GPL rules conflicting. I think to exclude all GPL engines would be unfortunate so what is the solution? Should only GPL engines that do not utilize other GPL engines or derive from other GPL engines be accepted in tournaments? If so to what extent and who judges? The issue is complicated and I don’t have the solution and doubt we can get everyone to agree on a reasonable solution any time soon. Anyway I see no double standard issue here.

This is a tough issue, and I'm not really sure which side I am on. I think that it is best to have lots of open source engines and that tournaments proceed as normal. Clones would not be allowed unless they were significantly different. I think that having the spirit of competition and the spirit of science are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Perhaps everyone would lead Bob's example and "keep secrets" until the big annual tournament, but then tell them.

[Ryan Benitez]

Yes, I've heard about this, very interesting. I remember hearing that Chess64 has a very efficient parallel algorithm. Care to discuss any details, if you have any? Also, what language is Chess64 in, because I (once again) remember hearing that Fabien wanted to write a program in Ada or another language?

Well its YBW so the smp is not new or different, just clean well debugged code. I do vaguely recall he mentioned wanting to write a chess program in his own programming language but that it was not advanced enough yet. Chess64 is done in real C++ so it is not as portable as a C project like Fruit. It is still a young project but I think it has a lot of potential.