Author: margolies,marc
Date: 20:13:57 12/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
As I understand the relevant passage about plagiarism challenges, the prima facie case is made an engine making the same moves as another known engine during play. If contestants do not have the right to challenge during play, you may pepper the broth to such a degree that an accomplished cheater could switch engines during play and survive anyone's right to challenge him. On December 01, 2003 at 19:35:15, Mike Byrne wrote: >You have 3 years to work on this: > >1. Improve the computer source challenge - challenges should be me made prior >to or after the tournament, but not during. If a challenge is made after the >tournament, then all of the disqualified contestant games should be stricken >from the official record as if they were never played. All contestants should >be advised of the dates that they must provide source prior to/ or after the >tournament so they can plan accordingly. There should be also a procedure to >ensure that the source provided is the one actually used by the contestants. >I'm sure something could be worked out. > >Alternatively, the all sources could be reviewed prior to the tournament by the >experts who have signed non-disclosure agreements and why not - if Fritz Ruel >has to provide his code - make everyone provide their code for inspection. I >seriously doubt that would pass. > >2. Something has to be done about the draw rule - that game should have never >been allowed to continue. For 30 years, the correct rules were followed - this >year it was not - that is a disgrace. > >Other than that, it was a great tournament [cough, cough]. > >Seriously, whatever goodwill that the tournament generated was torpedo by these >two events that were mishandled. That is a shame.
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.