a Telltale position

[Ralph Stoesser]

So is it confirmed then, irrefutable?

Houdini is multi-core optimized robo?

The likelihood of it not being exactly that, is somewhere between nil and zero percent.

Chris

so you seriously think houdini is just a better smp version of ivanhoe?

It started as Robbolito just as Ivanhoe did.

I'm deadly serious.

So what. Would be much more interesting to know what exactly makes H1.5 so much stronger. Now. Not in 5 years...

[Christopher Conkie]

So is it confirmed then, irrefutable?

Houdini is multi-core optimized robo?

The likelihood of it not being exactly that, is somewhere between nil and zero percent.

Chris

so you seriously think houdini is just a better smp version of ivanhoe?

It started as Robbolito just as Ivanhoe did.

I'm deadly serious.

So what. Would be much more interesting to know what exactly makes H1.5 so much stronger. Now. Not in 5 years...

You better start disassembling to see which numbers he changed then. You could become useful.....

[bob]

So is it confirmed then, irrefutable?

Houdini is multi-core optimized robo?

The likelihood of it not being exactly that, is somewhere between nil and zero percent.

Chris

I believe the correct saying is "chances are either slim or none, and slim just left town."

[Tom Barrister]

So it appears that some of you have reinvented the wheel for the 4285th time in attempting to prove that the original Ippolit/Robbilito/whatever series is a derivative of Rybka 2.3.2a or whichever version.

Would somebody mind running the same tests on Rybka 1.0 beta and the version of Fruit that it was allegedly taken from?

[Christopher Conkie]

I know you are watching Robert. Are you still trying to say that you did not use Robbolito as the code base for Houdini?

Do you not find it strange that Norman Schmidt is not complaining about 'his' code having been stolen and someone else taking all the glory?

Hahaha Gabor.

Well i suppose that is a "plus" side to it.......

[d]4q1kr/p6p/1prQPppB/4n3/4P3/2P5/PP2B2P/R5K1 w - - 0 1

RobboLito 0085g3 x32:
1/3 00:00 53 0 -5.09 Qxc6 Qxc6
1/7 00:00 82 0 -4.28 Qf8+ Qxf8 Bxf8 Kxf8
1/7 00:00 106 0 -0.77 Qd5 Rxe6
1/7 00:00 124 0 -0.11 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7
2/7 00:00 218 1,000 -0.11 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7
3/11 00:00 616 4,000 -0.32 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Qe7
4/16 00:00 1,567 11,000 -0.58 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Nf7 Be3 Rxe4
5/16 00:00 2,158 15,000 -0.58 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Nf7 Be3 Rxe4
6/17 00:00 4,628 31,000 -0.87 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Nf7 Bd2 Rxe4 Bf3
6/17 00:00 9,515 62,000 -0.19 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
7/17 00:00 10,585 68,000 -0.19 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
8/17+ 00:00 13,306 83,000 -0.11 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
8/17+ 00:00 14,863 91,000 -0.03 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
8/17 00:00 17,209 104,000 0.00 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Qe7 Qa8+ Qe8 Qd5

FireBird 1.0 beta w32:
1 00:00 53 0 -5.09 Qxc6 Qxc6
1 00:00 82 0 -4.28 Qf8+ Qxf8 Bxf8 Kxf8
1 00:00 106 0 -0.77 Qd5 Rxe6
1 00:00 124 0 -0.11 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7
1 00:00 179 0 -0.11 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7
2 00:00 218 0 -0.11 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7
2 00:00 315 1,000 -0.11 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7
3 00:00 616 2,000 -0.32 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Qe7
3 00:00 717 3,000 -0.32 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Qe7
4 00:00 1,567 6,000 -0.58 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Nf7 Be3 Rxe4
4 00:00 1,696 7,000 -0.58 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Nf7 Be3 Rxe4
5 00:00 2,159 9,000 -0.58 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Nf7 Be3 Rxe4
5 00:00 2,306 9,000 -0.58 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Nf7 Be3 Rxe4
6 00:00 4,629 18,000 -0.87 Qa3 Rxe6 Qxa7 Nf7 Bd2 Rxe4 Bf3
6 00:00 9,516 32,000 -0.19 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
6 00:00 9,657 32,000 -0.19 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
7 00:00 10,586 35,000 -0.19 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
7 00:00 10,762 36,000 -0.19 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
8+ 00:00 13,130 44,000 0.00 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
8+ 00:00 14,689 47,000 0.00 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Nf7 Bc4 Rc6 e5 Rc5
8 00:00 17,001 54,000 0.00 Qd5 Rxe6 Rf1 Qe7 Qa8+ Qe8 Qd5

[zullil]

So is it confirmed then, irrefutable?

Houdini is multi-core optimized robo?

The likelihood of it not being exactly that, is somewhere between nil and zero percent.

Chris

so you seriously think houdini is just a better smp version of ivanhoe?

It started as Robbolito just as Ivanhoe did.

I'm deadly serious.

The evidence seems overwhelming. I wish Robert had simply admitted up front that Houdini was a modified Robbolito, and that he had released his source code all along. Clearly his modifications have significantly improved what he began with, and incorporating a parallel search seems a non-trivial addition. But now the charade is ended, and I'm afraid he ends up looking bad.

[rbarreira]

It is a bit sad and disturbing, because Robert Houdart usually appears like a nice, knowledgeable and fairly levelheaded person...

[zullil]

Yeah, I agree.

[Don]

I feel that if a program does not see White's edge in the given position it is probably just undervaluing minor pieces. However a specific bonus for three minors vs. queen is the easiest fix here, I'm pretty sure your program must consistently overvalue the queen's side of this equation. It remains a mystery to me why the optimum value for minors (compared to majors) seems to be lower for engines than for humans. The values (for minors) that tested as best in Rybka are clearly too low to human eyes. That's why I always used Rybka 3 Human rather than the default for analysis of human games, it had the values much closer to what we human GMs think best.

Larry

When you say 'the value for minors' I assume you are speaking of the material score. In the evaluation, as you probably know too well, it all gets added up to a single number. When you have 3 minors vs a queen and you are just considering the material side of things it may seem the queen is overestimated, but the 3 minors will often add up to more when considering all the other terms - like mobility. If you consider the average value of the queen vs the average value of a minor it should get closer to a GMs assessment I think. It's just that estimating the average value of a piece is not so easy.
This is really one of the big problems with writing and tuning the evaluation, the terms are not orthogonal.

No, Komodo goes to some trouble to make sure the values of the pieces are centered. We have a mobility adjustment factor so that low mobility is actually negative and the pieces square tables have negative as well as positive values in them too. It should not be the case for us that we have to use low base values for pieces to compensate for all the bonuses we might give.

[Damir]

As long as he is not charging any money for his improved Robbo open source based engine I am not complaining, as well as all others who are using it, and there are many...