Author: Thomas Mayer
Date: 16:40:18 02/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hi John, >> I want to start near the end of your posting: >>> (Forget about Nalimov's EGTB probing code and any other code that can be >>> used with permission). >> THIS is the point where clones are splitted. When everything happens with >> permission of the author of the original source and with mentioning him >> everywhere, then I am fine with that. Example: Beowulf (original) and >> Horizon... or TSCP (original) and Trace (where I believe that the newer >> Trace have not much TSCP left in them) >> Here, everything is fine... >> If there is no permission and/or no mentioning copying source-code is >> definitely a "no-no" ! >> So the answers: >>> If the author took Crafty and completely rewrote the evaluation code and >>> nothing else, would it be a clone? >> CLONE >>> How about if the author rewrote the evaluation code and search algorithm >>> only, but left the hashing code, et. al.? >> CLONE >>> How about if the author rewrote everything EXCEPT for the evaluation? >> CLONE >>> How about if the author rewrote everything EXCEPT for Crafty's evaluation >>> of passed pawns? >> CLONE >> Why this all ? Well, it's simple: usually you can't take part of Crafty's >> code and implement that in your own engine -> it would simply not fit in >> your internal datastructures... if it does, then it is suspicious... > Fair enough, and an easy definition to understand. > But let's say that an author took TSCP, modified it to some degree and gave > Tom credit. Even though you do not call that a clone, would you still say it > is acceptable for it to be entered in a tournament like the CCT? Do you think > others would complain? Well, here it starts to get complicated... It depends somehow on the rules: E.g. in the official tournaments by the ICGA and those which take these rules (e.g. IPCCC and I think Dutch open) it would be problematic to start with just a modified program. Or the author of the original must be also mentioned as author and then he usually can not start with his own creation -> one program per one author... TSCP is maybe a bad example, because usually you must increase it's strength a lot befor you can enter with it in a tourney -> and therefor the final version would not share much with the original... One well known example here is Movei, which has started with TSCP, but I would really wonder if there is a single line of TSCP left in it's chess code... (Might be more in the user interface) -> anyway, this is well known because Uri told this initially and with given respect this is what Tom had in mind with his fine TSCP -> to give beginners a starting point. Besides, with Crafty it is for one point definitely different: Just take a look in it's source: ******************************************************************************* * * * Crafty, copyright 1996-2001 by Robert M. Hyatt, Ph.D., Associate Professor * * of Computer and Information Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham. * * * * All rights reserved. No part of this program may be reproduced in any * * form or by any means, for other than your personal use, without the * * express written permission of the author. This program may not be used in * * whole, nor in part, to enter any computer chess competition without * * written permission from the author. Such permission will include the * * requirement that the program be entered under the name "Crafty" so that * * the program's ancestry will be known. * * * * Copies of the source must contain the original copyright notice intact. * I think it can't be stated clearer... Greets, Thomas
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.