Author: Madhavan
Date: 17:32:26 02/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2005 at 19:31:58, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 15, 2005 at 18:38:43, John Merlino wrote: > >>I'm not trying to start a brutally long thread here, but I'm just curious about >>how people feel about a particularly touchy subject -- clones. What, in your >>mind, would lead you to the conclusion that an engine is a clone? >> >>Let's forget trying to find ways to PROVE that a clone is a clone; I'm just >>trying to define one. For the sake of argument, assume that the author of this >>engine in question tells you exactly what he did and did not do, and you must >>decide whether to call it a clone or not. >> >>Here are some hypothetical questions to start the debate: >> >>If the author took Crafty and completely rewrote the evaluation code and nothing >>else, would it be a clone? > >Yes. If you violate the rules of the software agreement, it is clearly a 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. > >>I think you can see where I'm driving. Obviously, many engine authors have >>studied Crafty and other engines whose authors have graciously provided their >>source code. But, for an engine to not be considered a clone, does it have to be >>absolutely 100% the work of the author? (Forget about Nalimov's EGTB probing >>code and any other code that can be used with permission). >> >>Many thanks in advance for your thoughts, >> >>jm (who's just preparing for any eventuality during his upcoming stint as >>moderator :-) > >If there is one single line of Crafty code used without permission or >acknowledgement then it is a clone. > >If permission is received to use it, then that is obviously different. > >If the permissions in the header are followed (acknowledge origin, can't use in >contests against crafty, etc. then it's not a clone.) > >However, you can use the algorithms. Just not the code. What that means >exactly will differ somewhat (perhaps) due to personal opinions. > >In the case of Crafty, I think it clear that it is best to stay completely away, >because Dr. Hyatt is sick and tired of cloners and may be very angry with what >would otherwise seem a minor transgression. Dann, without looking on whats in the code,How do you determine if the engine has source code that contains same code(of some open source say crafty or fruit) except evaluation and search.
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.