Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 23:40:48 05/05/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 2005 at 23:10:26, Steven Edwards wrote: >On May 05, 2005 at 21:59:42, Dann Corbit wrote: >>On May 05, 2005 at 21:52:42, Dave Potesta wrote: > >>>I always assumed that all the engines out there were original, >>>I guess not. Most don't even say it. >>> I guess the Chess Programmer world is even smaller than I once thought. >>> >>> Which engines are clones? >> >>All of them in one sense -- the ideas are all borrowed from others. The amount >>of stuff that's truly original in any chess engine is probably about 5% on >>average. > >The above comment is a bit general, but isn't too far from the truth. And kind >of sad as well. > >For the record, Symbolic's ChessLisp interpreter and the Lisp move selection >source represent 30K+ lines of source that won't be found in any other program. >The same could be said of the 65K line C++ toolkit except for the parts I lifted >from Spector. Then again, I expect that most of the algorithms are not pure invention, but from chess papers or Knuth or perusing other sources (not with an intention of duplication but of understanding). Similarly for evaluation -- we read what someone did or analyzed and implement it -- possibly changed in some ways. Copying of ideas is not all bad. That is (in fact) how knowledge advances. However, there are some lines that are occasionally crossed that should not be (e.g. plagiarism, copyright violation, etc.)
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.