Author: Ryan B.
Date: 20:12:53 12/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 22, 2005 at 22:58:22, Graham Banks wrote: >On December 22, 2005 at 22:54:21, Ryan B. wrote: > >>On December 22, 2005 at 22:43:35, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: >> >>> >>>I am very respectiful of the creator of fruit 2.2. and the way he has influenced >>>programing. Having said that, it looks to me that toga is similar to fruit, but >>>also clearly distinguishable from fruit in terms of how it evaluats a postion. >>> >>> Check out the stats here : >>>http://kd.lab.nig.ac.jp/chess/cegt/engine-distance-table-best-300.shtml >>> >>> >>>Unforutnately, there are no head to head comparisons of fruit and toga, but you >>>can look at how similar they are when competing against the same engine. For >>>example, togas evaluations are more similar to ktula 7.5 evaluations than >>>fruits. >>> >>>this is not definitive reasoning, unfortunately. Fruit went comericial between >>>version 2.1 and 2.2, and the new code was no longer public access. maybe the >>>observed differences are due to what was added in 2.2. i.e., maybe fruit 2.1 >>>is almost identifical to toga, but 2.2 is quite different? any data on this? >>> >>>best >>>Joseph >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>On December 22, 2005 at 22:15:18, Peter Kappler wrote: >>> >>>>On December 22, 2005 at 20:33:50, Zappa wrote: >>>> >>>>>A different view: >>>>> >>>>>Hydra, too weak to show at Paderborn >>>>>Zappa, the best thing since sliced bread >>>>>Fruit, proving once again that KISS works. >>>>>Toga II, the clone of fruit with literally 50 lines changed that people somehow >>>>>credit as a real engine >>>> >>>>And isn't it true the the author of Toga initially tried to claim that the code >>>>was 100% his? It's beyond me why anybody recognizes Toga as a distinct engine. >>>>It sounds like it contains about as much original work as a Chessmaster >>>>personality. >>>> >>>>-Peter >>>> >>>> >>>>>Rybka, an interesting and totally different approach that seems to work real >>>>>well >>>>> >>>>>anthony >> >> >>Toga is a more tactical less positional version of Fruit 2.1. Very little >>change in actual personality beyond that. >> >>Ryan > > >Hi Ryan, > >how would you classify your Gambit Fruit compared to Fruit 2.1 and Toga? > >Graham. More aggressive and more positional but less tactical and has some unsound (but in my opinion fun) chess knowledge. In the positional.epd test I tested with Toga got 57 points out of 113 Fruit 2.1 got 63 points and Gambit Fruit 4bx got 71 points. I think Fruit will pass both engines both positionally and tactically soon though. It is only a matter of time until Fabian shocks the computer chess community again in my opinion. Ryan
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.