Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Bionic Vs Crafty Debate: some data required

Author: Fernando Villegas

Date: 05:24:14 01/25/99


Hi:
I have been amazed a little bit by the fact that in the long thread about bionic
as a clone or not  nobody seems to have given data about how much Bionic is
really something new or not, to begin with. The only thing that has been said
about his presumed novelty is Dgeordge Vidanovic's statement that it is new;
only thing that has been said about his presumed clone quality is the afirmation
by Bob that a program that has changed only 1% of the code cannot be considered
something new. Well, which are the data to support one or the other statement?
Maybe also some elaboration would be needed. By example, how much percentage of
code change it is neccesary to talk of a change? It is enough a different
behaviour of the engine?
By the way, this last point could be deceiving. I can change dramatically the
behaviour of CM6000 just altering strongly one of the paremeters of the code,
say, putting the queen value at only 0.5 pawns. I bet that that would be enough
to get an extremely different PV from the engine.
Fernando



This page took 0.02 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.