Author: margolies,marc
Date: 15:02:25 11/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
LIST is not accused of being a clone of anything. LIST's author is accused of PLAGIARIZING some of Dr. Hyatt's open code from Crafty and incorporating it based upon the contraversy and behavior of previous LIST versions--that is the foundation of the charge--not the behavior of the current list at the tourney. This is an ethical charge of not attributing work and the author is alleged to have failed to respond to the charge. On November 27, 2003 at 17:15:48, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >On November 27, 2003 at 15:17:51, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1330 > > >This whole episode stinks of a conspiracy. > >I hope the reason for all this complaint that ICGA entertained from the yet to >be named programmer is not based on something stupid like binary size or nps or >output format or the rc file syntax or something like that ! > >A preliminary tests like time to solution , depth required , principle variation >, etc for a set of test positions would give a very basic idea of whether the >engines are same - and from what I have seen , they are not. > >If this was not the basis by which the complaint was entertained - then how was >it determined that it could be a possible clone ? > >Just based on vague suspicion or malicious complaints , if I were asked to >present my engines source code - even if it is part of the tournament rules - >will not be acceptable to me : without giving me very solid reasons on why I >should do so. To me , it will look as though I am being targetted due to some >envious programmer opponent. Especially since I dont see any others being asked >to do so ! > > >Another reason why I will have reservations will be that I will need to show my >entire source code - from line 1 to 99999 , including all files , which after >verification , they should typically compile and verify whether this is indeed >the same version as which was entered in the tournament. >Why would I want to submit to something ilke this ?! > >At ICC , someone was mentioning that list was a non-bitboard program. >If this is true : >Tell me , how can list be a clone of crafty ? >Its movegeneration will be different >Its eval will be different > >So based on pv_search and q_search and interface code it was decided that it is >a crafty clone ?!!!! >This is indeed ridiculous ! >Nearly all programs will indeed have the same structure in these three parts ! > > >This sort of arbitrary behavious should definitely not be encouraged. >I would really like all the participants to take a very strong and united stand >against such a declaration and get things sorted out either way. > > >Reading between the ilnes indicates that the author just did not trust the >committee enough to reveal his source code - and add to the fact that he has to >take an examination , would have been added pressure and so he would have just >considered all this just not worth it ! First they cast aspirations on his >integrity by asking him to reveal his source code , then they set a deadline >(which was not a very harsh one I must add) , on top of which , maybe according >to his priorities more important matters like his exam comes in. >He would have just decided f*** this , let me get on with my life !! > >Mridul
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.