Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 14:19:35 12/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 12, 2003 at 17:14:09, Sune Fischer wrote: >On December 12, 2003 at 16:53:27, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>in the past, it has been legal to *manually* play in CCT. This is no longer >>>acceptable - essentially, you now have to find a way to play that: >>> >>>(a) is completely automatic. >>>(b) allows your program to kibitz its search information as it plays. >>> >>>I think the community at large (ie the community of chess programmers) believes >>>that this is not an unreasonable set of requirements. >> >>All these requirements come to prevent cheating. > >And to make it more enjoyable to watch. > >>But cheating is still very >>easily possible. For example, how would you stop the operator from clicking >>"move now"?! > >I think you would have to hack winboard to do that, but of course it can be >done. > >Let's face reality though, it's not possible to prevent cheating 100%, not >unless you are in complete control of all the stages... > >*) source code must be viewed by a neutral party >*) a neutral party must observe (or do) the compiling of the binary/engine >*) the engine must be playing from a machine monitored by a neutral party >*) a panel of unpartial offcials agrees that the neutral party hasn't been >brived... > >So actually, I think it is enough to weed out those 5 min. hacks some people >might want to use. >My impression is that those willing to spend tens of hours, perhaps even >hundreds of hours, on creating a completely unrecognizable clone would be more >likely to start their own original project. We are in agreement here: From http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/~davoudo/analyzer.txt " The "SourceAnalyzer" takes a completely different approach in trying to detect plagiarism (see below). This program is available for everyone's use(!), my belief is that students who try to copy others' codes, will try to make many changes to the code, to avoid detection. Now if they use this strict "SourceAnalyzer", they will certainly have to modify much larger parts of code. So my point to such people is "safe plagiarism is harder than writing the code by yourself!", since they'll have to work really hard to beat this plagiarism detector. If they do manage to beat "SourceAnalyzer", it means that they have modified almost all the code, which for itself means that they have almost done the whole thing by themselves! " > >-S. >>>Andrew
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.