Author: Jason Williamson
Date: 15:50:30 09/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
Yace is an example of an engine that came on the scene very strong, if i recall. On September 19, 2002 at 17:37:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 19, 2002 at 14:46:59, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > >>On September 19, 2002 at 14:20:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On September 19, 2002 at 11:47:01, Sune Fischer wrote: >>> >>>>On September 19, 2002 at 11:24:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>The only thing that concerns me is that anytime a brand new and unheard-of >>>>>engine pops up, it is cause for concern _and_ suspicion. It might be perfectly >>>>>legitimate, who knows. But remember "voyager", "le petite", "bionic impact", >>>>>"gunda" and others? >>>>> >>>>>Jumping way up to near the front of the pack is not easy. Doing it without >>>>>ever having been to a public event is even more unlikely. >>>>> >>>>>It would be interesting to examine the executable if anyone has a copy, to >>>>>avoid the suspicions before they start to grow... >>>> >>>>That suspicion is natural, but if this engine really is that strong, then he >>>>must have improved a lot on Crafty or whatever code he used. >>>>There has been many Crafty clones, but no one actually stronger than Crafty >>>>AFAIK, so Ruffian is really not your average clone in that case. >>>> >>> >>>It depends. IE on any given day, crafty can beat anybody, or be beaten by >>>anybody. Look at the results for "Le Petite". It looked very strong. Yet >>>it was an absolute copy... >>> >>> >>> >>>>But apart from that, have you ever really gone over all the open source programs >>>>out there, and what about the CCC archives? There is plenty of information >>>>available to build a mighty strong engine. I don't think it could be done in 6 >>>>months, but who knows how much time he spent on it, hopefully it was a good >>>>decade ;) >>>> >>>>-S. >>> >>>That's the point. I can't imagine someone working on an engine, in a vacuum, >>>for a decade, before anyone finds out about it. I can't imagine anyone writing >>>a program in 6 months that would come close to beating _any_ top program. >>> >>>Anything is possible, I will agree. But the probability is so low that it >>>will make people wonder... >> >>I hope you realize that you have essentially *publicly* leveled an accusation >>without presenting any evidence. I would prefer in such cases that either an >>investigation be conducted discretely or a wait and see policy be followed. > > >I haven't leveled _any_ accusation whatsoever. I asked a direct question, >pointing out what has happened in the past. I have _not_ said that this >program is a "clone" or anything else, and you can feel free to find some- >thing I wrote that does make that claim... > >As I said previously, I find it _hard_ to believe that a newcomer would be >that strong. _not_ impossible, just _unlikely_. I stand by that... If some- >one takes that the wrong way, fine by me...
This page took 0.01 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.