Author: Tom Likens
Date: 07:38:02 02/09/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 08, 2005 at 23:02:53, Daniel Shawul wrote: >On February 08, 2005 at 20:52:44, Tom Likens wrote: > >>On February 08, 2005 at 11:10:17, Daniel Shawul wrote: >> >>>On February 08, 2005 at 09:52:07, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>> >>>>On February 08, 2005 at 00:09:45, Daniel Shawul wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hello every one, >>>>> I read in the threads below that some people still suspect >>>>>danchess to be a clone. It is not a clone of any engine . If any body has any >>>>>doubts , he can ask me and i can send the source to a reliable person so that >>>>>it is checked. But please don't make posts here and there telling what you think >>>>>it is. >>>>> Danchess is participating in every other tournament because >>>>>it is found not to be a clone. In WBEC for example a group of people checked it >>>>>and found it not to be a clone so it is participating. There is no place ,at >>>>>least one that i know of, that danchess is not particaipating because of this >>>>>issue. >>>>>I have sent my source to Hyatt a couple of times but i do not know if he checked >>>>>it or not,becaues i have got no response. If he wants i can send it to him >>>>>again,but it will only be a waste of his time and mine since there is no >>>>>similarity. >>>>> My current version is as strong as crafty even better which i am very proud >>>>>of. Check the games at AEGT where danchess trashed crafty 7.5 - 2.5. >>>>>somepeople just like talking about others. I like to work rather than talk. >>>>>I am sorry if i sounded very pompous but that is not my intention. >>>>> >>>>>best wishes >>>>>daniel >>>> >>>>I've been quite impressed by the improvements in DanChess (including the >>>>parallel code), but 10 games is not _nearly_ enough to draw conclusions. I've >>>>seen Zappa beat Crafty 10 times in a row, and vice versa . . . . >>>> >>>>anthony >>> >>> I think i made a little mistake in my statement above >>> My current version is as strong as crafty even **SOMETIMES** better... >>> >>>without **SOMETIMES** the sentence would have been incomplete. >>> >>> As i said in my reply to Uri. I am not drawing any conclusions with this >>>games,I know statistics is a tricky thing. >>>But still i think i can say with a good safety factor that danchess is as strong >>>as crafty. This ofcourse depends on the definition of "as strong". For me +- >>>30elo is insignificant. >>> I really don't want to discuss on this issue further because this is not Why i >>>originally posted the message. >>>Hope you understand. >>>daniel >> >>Hey Dan, >> >Hi tom > >>Well, you can certainly feel justified in saying that beating Crafty >>7.5-2.5 is better than *losing* by the same margin. Of course as >>others have pointed out statistically insignificant, but what the heck. >> > that's is correct,it is very much statistically insiginificant. >and i am sorry if i gave the wrong impression. I just brought it up >,becuase i *think* they are at the same level looking at results of different. >May be crafty is much better. I don't know. > > >>BTW, like Anthony I've also been impressed with DanChess's improvement >>over the last year, congratulations and good luck in CCT7. >> > Thanks for the nice words! >>regards, >>--tom > >best wishes >daniel >p.s: you have been away for some time, what's up with Djinn? Work has been crazy over the last year. I got promoted and subsequently put in charge of an engineering team. I was glad to be promoted but I severely underestimated the amount of time it would require. Things are starting to settle down a bit, so I'm hoping to start working again on either Djinn or even more likely a completely new engine, using 0x88 techniques instead of bitboards (even more radical--I'm thinking of regressing to C from C++). I'm also considering open sourcing it, since that might be interesting. regards, --tom
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.