Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 03:38:35 01/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 2004 at 15:00:29, Thomas Mayer wrote: >Hi Mogens, Hey Thomas, >Of course the version of List which have played at Graz could not be a simple >clone. Not at all... but there is the possibility that he might have used big >parts of Crafty like the evaluation etc... Anyway he must have spent a huge >amount of work in it to get it as strong as it is - it is not a trivial thing to >get Crafty 100 Elos stronger... But of course we all do not know anything about >it right now because it could be still true that List shares no line at all with >Crafty - I still hope that it is the case... Again, I see no reference to what triggered the suspicion. After all, filenames and variables were discovered after the fact I presume. >Maybe you take a look at Crafty SE -> just looking at the output of the >different personalities would make you already think that those are all >different programs... Still, it doesn't answer why the suspicion was raised. Was it based on hearsay or moves played in a championship game? Or both? I assume you didn't check the executable while the operator wasn't looking ;-). Either way, similiarity in eval and move choice is the visual indication of foul play AFAIK. In Denis Grafen's case it was very obvious, because the proof was easily detected with the naked eye. Regards, Mogens
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.