Author: Dave Potesta
Date: 06:10:14 05/06/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 06, 2005 at 02:40:48, Dann Corbit wrote: >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.) Dann, So when one reads that EngineZ is a "clone" of EngineA, it isn't necessarily that the person who 'wrote' EngineZ just recompiled 100% of EngineA's source and came up with a new logo. 'Clone' is also a name for engines who borrow heavily from another engine, for example, taking the search algorithm, move selection, 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.