Author: José Carlos
Date: 06:08:53 12/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2001 at 22:40:16, Dann Corbit wrote: >On December 20, 2001 at 22:26:47, Christophe Theron wrote: >[snip] >>"Copy, paste" is a metaphor. >> >>It's "copy, paste" of the METHODS not of the actual code. >> >>When I say "Crafty clone" I mean "Crafty methods clone". > >Like what -- use of null move? Use of negascout pvs search? Is something else >really a lot better? I have researched many search algorithms and I try them >all. I also try to invent my own ideas. Crafty does not use some other things >that I have tried (and will revisit again). And a lot of techniques that you >see all over are the same ones as we see in crafty. No wonder, since crafty has >been open source for ten years and most of the newcomers are far younger than >that. Crafty and GnuChess were the only Winboard engines to look at for a >while. I think that there are probably more 0x88 type engines than bitboard. > >A lot of people like MTD(f), and I found another very simple interesting search >algorithm in a paper that I am going to try. I also have some of my own ideas. >One example is to speculate by quickly tracing the pv (sort of go into auto-play >mode at [e.g.] one second intervals and go forward 10 plys or so like that. The >idea is to help out move ordering and also to see some disasters that loom over >the horizon. Obviously, this works better with more cpu's than with just one. >Also, if I have a CPU farm, I have an idea that I have discussed before, where >they cooperate and search the most promising lines. With this type of search we >have much more information than alpha-beta will give, because I have a score for >every forward position root. > > >>For me it's the same. I do not see where the creativity is. > >I don't think you have studied the source code of other engines. All of them >are different. All of them are creative. All are interesting. I have really >seen one or two engines which are just a quick clone with a tweak (I find this >out by binary snooping because those who will publish their code would not be so >brazen as to do this). But almost all engines are interesting and highly >original. Creativity is also supported by knowledge. If you lack basic knowledge you can create basic ideas. If you have deep understanding you can create really new and specialized stuff. I don't think one has to be creative all the time. There are phases. First phase is study and uderstand (which involves trying to solve problems _before_ reading the solution). Second phase is improve, write advanced stuff, try wierd ideas, see what happens. Then you have knowledge enough to specilize, to research in very new and advanced techniques, supported by the solid understanding you have about the basic techniques. I think most of us winboard-amateurs are in the first or second phase. Some will go farther, some not. It depends on talent and time invested. >In other words, I think you will find creativity if you look carefully. Mostly, >I think you just are not very interested in what other people have done and >prefer to think things up by yourself. That's certainly a noble attitude, but >one that does not work well for someone as lazy as me. > >>I repeat that I consider writing a chess engine, even under these conditions, as >>a great personal achievement. It's something that counts in your life. >> >>What I do not understand is the reason why we should celebrate the number of >>such engines. They are extremely valuable for the persons who have been able to >>write one, but are they for other people? It's definetly a reason to celebrate, specially for commercials. Many amateurs engines, with many fans each, means a lot of interest in computer chess. The more interest in computer chess, the more chances commercial programmers can sell their programs. If you ask "why do those weak engines have fans?", there are many reasons: - Authors and friends/relatives, obviuosly. - Amateur authors are helped by people. Those people who help the programmer "feel" like they have contributed to the thing, so they consider it partially own. - For some reason I fail to understand (maybe psicologysts know) people tend to assess human personalities to the programs. When you read posts about tests matches, you see things like "phalanx tried desperately to attack" or "crafty is in good shape" or "fritz didn't give a chance to tiger". And, the same way you like some people, then you end up liking some program. - People from Spain will probably be happy with Pepito's or Averno's success. Italians are happy with Leila or Delfi. In Argentina Gaviota has a lot of fans and the same for Amyan in Uruguay. Not all coutries have top programmers, but I'd be happy if I could run a Spanish winboard championsip, or form a Spain team. - ... José C. >Suppose that there are only two sculptors in the world. Then suddenly there are >one hundred. Mabye the first two are the best, but the new ones will get >better. > >>Naturally there are exceptions. Amongst the Winboard engines there are very >>valuable ones. > >All of them are valuable, if they are the object of enjoyment for someone.
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.