Author: Don Dailey
Date: 08:21:51 01/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 23, 1999 at 10:52:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 23, 1999 at 10:12:36, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: > >>On January 23, 1999 at 00:07:11, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>Isn't Bionic Impakt Crafty? Does anybody know what changes have been made to >>>the program in order to distinguish it from the original Crafty? >>> >>>bruce >> >>I have been asked by Frank Quisinsky to translate his statement regarding Bionic >>Impakt. Here it is: >> >>"Persönlich habe ich mich beim Dutch Open 98 (Bionic Impakt wurde dritter) >>sehr lange mit Hans Secelle (Programmerer) unterhalten welcher mir >>versicherte, das Bionic kein Crafty ist. Bionic Impakt beruht zwar auf dem >>Source Code von Crafty (Version 9.26 und 15.20), jedoch wurde das Programm vor >>einem Jahr völlig neu überarbeitet. Ferner hat Hans seine eigenen entwickelten >>Ideen implementiert. Unter anderem sind die Bewertungsfunktionen, wie z. B. >>Figurenfelder, Angriffsheuristiken, Bewertung an der Wurzel als auch das >>Eröffnungsbuch und dessen Zeitkontrollen von Bionic übernommen wurden. >>Persönlich schätzt Hans die taktischen Fähigkeiten gegenüber Crafty etwas >>schlechter und die positionellen etwas stärker ein. Als Beweis dient hier >>z.B. der LCT II Test welcher, völlig unterschiedliche Ergebnisse im Vergleich >>zu Crafty aufzeigt. Ich habe das überprüft und Bionic hat wirklich nichts >>mit Crafty gemeinsam." >> >>I spent lots of time with Hans Secelle during the Dutch Open 98 (Bionic placed >>third) trying to make sure that Bionic is not Crafty. Bionic is based on >>Crafty's source code (versions 9.26 and 15.20) but the program was completely >>rewritten, which took a year. Furthermore, Hans implemented his own, original >>ideas. Among others, the new evaluation functions such as piece squares, attack >>heuristics, root-evals, as well as the opening book and time controls that were >>taken over from Bionic [I presume the previous version of Bionic that had been >>around for quite some time, say since 1991, Dj.V.]. Hans estimates that the >>tactical abilities of Bionic are not on a par with Crafty, while its positional >>play is somewhat better. The LCTII test can be used as evidence for this, as it >>gives completely different scores when compared with Crafty. I have checked >>this out and Crafty and Bionic have really nothing in common. >> >>Regards, >>Djordje > > >This is wrong. The version of bionic that playedin the first 1/2 of the >Dutch tournament matched crafty _exactly_. Every move of every game except >for 1 or 2. > >But that isn't nearly so important as one key thing they 'get'... that being >a parallel search that no one else has. Which gives them a 2x-3x speed boost >over everyone else. So to say 'it isn't crafty' is baloney. A few eval changes >don't make a new program. I've also pointed out that anybody that takes the >crafty source is _required_ to make that source public as part of the freeware >project. They've never done this. IE I'd like to see a source version >released that will _exactly_ match the Dutch tourney moves. _then_ we could >_know_ what is different. They were going to do this, supposedly. But nothing >has been done. The big issue at the tournament was whether this was the case or not. They clearly had a version that was significanly different, but was it the version that played in the tournament or not? Which version did Cilkchess play? - Don
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.