Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: SELECTIVE MATH BY HYATT

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 11:28:31 05/21/04

Go up one level in this thread


On May 21, 2004 at 13:44:19, Matthew Hull wrote:

>On May 21, 2004 at 12:57:16, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On May 21, 2004 at 12:38:01, Matthew Hull wrote:
>>
>>>On May 21, 2004 at 12:24:12, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 21, 2004 at 12:22:36, Matthew Hull wrote:
>>>>they are frauded search times.
>>>
>>>
>>>But your reason for claiming fraud is that DIEP does not duplicate the
>numbers. >>
>>>Since DIEP uses a different parrallel algorithim than the program described
>in >>the paper, your alleged proof of fraud is unfounded.  The only way it
>could be >>is if DIEP is based upon the parallel/split strategy described in
>the paper. >>But everyone knows that it's not.
>>>
>>>Therefore, your claim is extremely unconvincing.
>>>
>>
>>
>>You are _totally_ missing his point.  His reason for claiming "fraud" is that
>he >can't produce decent speedup numbers for his own program.  His "sponsors"
>>aparently knew about the Cray Blitz numbers, and when his effort "flopped" he
>>had to do _something_ to avoid looking foolish.  He told me _exactly_ that in
>a >private email before this all "broke loose"..  It isn't about intellectual
>>honesty.  It is about _fraud_.  His fraud and his dishonesty.
>
>
>
>Yes, his agenda is pretty clear.  One cannot help but be mystified as to how
>postings (accusations) in this forum make their way to his "sponsors".  How
>does a private citizen acquire patrons who can be so easily flim-flammed?
>Is that how he pays the rent?
>
>
>I believe you posted that he and GCP use "heavy processes" instead of
>"threads", and that as such, the speed potential is somewhat less.
>
>
>I had thought the 2003 machine VD had was a kind of NUMA, and that it took a
>long time to get all the processors busy.  Would that have had anything to do
>with the process vs thread decision?

Who knows. I use threads on SMP.  On NUMA.  There is no significant reason not
to.  And since Eugene's EGTB code is specifically designed for threads as well,
the gain by having a large shared LRU cache of table data is also worthwhile.

But forget arguing that point to Vincent.  "Crafty can't work at NUMA".  Then
when I post pretty good 4 CPU NUMA numbers "Crafty can't work at 8CPU or more
NUMA".  When I tell him I have 8 cpu data.  "Crafty can't work at 16cpu or more
NUMA".  It is a _moving_ target.  What I can't prove I can do, I can't do.  Once
I prove something, we go one level more complex and he makes the same dishonest
claim again, there...


>
>
>
>>
>>But, of course, if you just read my frequent responses to his posts, you'll
>get >the point.  He has made _plenty_ of accusations.  I have challenged each
>and >every one with facts _anyone_ can verify.  And he runs and hides.  But for
>this >one case, he _knows_ that all the original data was lost years ago, so he
>knows >that he has a chance of keeping this "alive" since I will never be able
>to >recover that data.  And so for 99% of his claims, I've shot him down each
>and >every time, so that he looks (by now) to be a complete fool.  But for this
>one >case, all I can do is explain how and why the numbers look as they do, and
>>that's all.  So there is a "crack" in the door and he keeps trying to squeeze
>>through.
>>
>>Now he apparently has my dissertation, even though he claimed he could not get
>>it for 6 weeks.  And he doesn't like the results there either.  But he can't
>>discredit them in the same way.  So now we are off in the "depth - first
>search >is not what anybody uses at a tournament." angle even though that is so
>utterly >stupid it is hard to believe anyone would make such a statement.  But
>it is a >part of his "discredit at all costs" agenda.
>>
>>Notice that when I post something he always says "send me the logs".  I
>usually >do, or as I did for the last set of data, I just put 'em on my ftp
>server for >_everyone_ to see.  Have you _ever_ seen him post "Hmmm...  Your
>logs show that >your 4 cpu speedup really was 3.2X..."  Not a chance.  Have you
>ever seen _him_ >post any logs here showing _anything_ about his speedup?  Who
>do you suppose >_really_ has something to hide?  I release my source.  I
>release my logs.  I >release my test sets.  What does Vincent release?  Lots of
>bullshit.  Nothing >more.  Nothing less.  Always the same.
>>
>>Lies and more lies, backed up by lies.  Never a retraction when caught
>>red-handed.  Just more lies, until he gets into a corner, and runs and hides
>>until the next time...



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.