Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 20:32:04 01/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 13, 2006 at 23:08:25, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 13, 2006 at 19:20:04, Dann Corbit wrote: >>On January 13, 2006 at 18:28:52, Uri Blass wrote: >>>On January 13, 2006 at 18:12:17, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>On January 13, 2006 at 17:32:10, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>On January 13, 2006 at 16:54:55, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: >>>>>>On January 13, 2006 at 15:58:57, Robert Hollay wrote: >>>>>>Hi Robert, >>>>>> >>>>>>>Shareware. Test SMIRF free until 2006-01-31. >>>>>> >>>>>>the beta still shows to be intended to become shareware. But I am not sure >>>>>>about that. There is no big interest facing those Rybka or top-engine hype. >>>>>>About since a year there repeatedly have been unrestricted beta versions, >>>>>>limited in lifetime to secure vanishing of old beta prereleases. But the echo >>>>>>has been very small and only one person asked, how to purchase a full version. >>>>>> >>>>>>>What will happen after that date? >>>>>> >>>>>>The beta version still could be tested, but the program would answer nearly >>>>>>immediately then, not reaching higher thinking levels, nag screens included. >>>>>> >>>>>>>I looked around the SMIRF site, but didn't quite understand it's licencing >>>>>>>model. Part of the text is written in German, especially the shareware licence. >>>>>>>What should we do to get it permanently? >>>>>> >>>>>>A sold / donated version would have texts also translated into English. >>>>>> >>>>>>SMIRF is now in a stage, where it should be rewritten completely to dense its >>>>>>data structure and to incoorporate made experiences. I am against open source >>>>>>programs for end-user applications like a chess engine. Arguing for that had >>>>>>raised a banning from the most visited german chess forum. I think, that >>>>>>freeware chess programs are dumping the whole scene, killing any respect and >>>>>>refund of creative programmers. >>>>> >>>>>It is correct that free chess programs clearly make it harder for programmers to >>>>>make money from chess engines but it seems to be also correct that free chess >>>>>programs help to improve the level of the best programs. >>>> >>>>I doubt this very much. >>>> >>>>There would never have been any money in mediocre chess engines with or without >>>>free ones. I believe that free engines stimulate the market. In fact, I am >>>>pretty sure I would never have bought any professional engines if it were not >>>>for the free ones to get me interested in them. >>>> >>>>Suppose that there are no free engines. Your program will still have to beat >>>>Junior, Shredder, Fritz, CM, etc. to be interesting as far as strength goes. >>>> >>>>And if you try to sell on features you will need a snazzy interface and a good >>>>database and hundreds of thousands of dollars for marketing. >>>> >>>>I think that the engines like Deep Sjeng, Ruffian, Rybka, Ktulu, etc. would not >>>>sell at all if it were not for the hobbyist market created by people who cruise >>>>forums like this one. >>> >>>I disagree here. >>> >>>Deep Sjeng and ruffian and Ktulu probably do not have many buyers because >>>correspondence players who want to buy only the best 2 engines do not buy it >>>when rybka may have more buyers than all of Deep Sjeng,Ruffian and Ktulu. >> >>So how will a weaker amateur engine figure into this mix? How will the >>existance of these engines cause problems? >> >>I doubt if any of the non-Chessbase non-ChessAssistant non-Chessmaster engines >>have sold more than 3000 or will sell more than 10,000 in their lifetimes. In >>any case, the lack of sales has nothing to do with amateur engines and >>everything to do with advertizeing, shelf space, etc. >> >>> I get if you ask Lokasoft, almost all of his sales will >>>>go to people who he recognized the names of (just a guess). >>>> >>>>>There was a long time with little improvement when shredder dominated and top >>>>>programmers could not improve their program even by 50 elo per year and suddenly >>>>>we find some programs that are better than shredder(rybka,commercial fruit and >>>>>fritz and probably hiarcs and the toga1.1 that is based on fruit). >>>> >>>>The improvement always goes in jumps and starts. The introduction of Junior was >>>>like that. Junior came out of nowhere as an amateur engine to be the best in >>>>the world. >>> >>>Junior never leaded the ssdf and I know no rating list with many games when it >>>leaded. >> >>Incorrect. I think it may have won more than once, but here is one of its >>winning lists: >>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/2640/ssdf/2000/ssdf0001.htm > >Ok I apologize and I was wrong here but it leaded it only for a short time and >by a small difference. > >Rybka is leading rating lists by bigger difference. Rybka is in second place: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/cegtrating4040all.html In case you want to object because of SMP, I would argue that SMP is an advance just like better search or better eval. It is not the fault of SMK that Rybka and Fruit can't do it yet. >>It also won the world championship 3 times: >>http://www.mark-weeks.com/chess/wcc-comp.htm > >I know it but the point is that the improvement now is bigger than the >improvement in previous years. I have not done any graphs, but I do agree that there may have been a bigger spike than usual recently. I interpret this as really smart people getting interested in computer chess. The same sort of thing has happened in the past. I think that the startling improvements are due to smart people with good ideas and enough drive to implement them. >>> It was fairly similar for Chess Tiger (which occupied the SSDF top >>>>spot for a short while). So Rybka is not an exception. I guess that a careful >>>>examination of all the big movers and shakers will show that Rybka is the rule. >>> >>>I think that rybka is clearly an exception if you compare it to programs of >>>2003-2005 >> >>Fruit. > >No > >Fruit commercial version was less than 50 elo better than shredder >When Rybka64 bit has bigger difference from the second place based on rating >lists. It is still relative. Fruit was a blast from a cannot. Rybka was too, with a little bigger warhead. But Fabien may have a bigger warhead on the shelf. Some of the others may also innovate. The Ruffian author was very quiet for a while and suddenly unleashed his creation. There may be another phase of that. I think that some of the most capable authors just don't put enough effort into it to become overpowering. For instance, the author of Gullydeckel is a very good programmer and a very good chess player. I think he could add 1000 Elo to his program (literally) but he is too busy doing real work. Simlarly, the author of Amy is quite a brilliant person and could advance with big effort. But again, I think that hobby time is lacking. To write a great chess engine requires two things: Great ability Great effort What we are seeing is those things in combination. You also need to be a little crazy (since the time spent writing the chess engine could be spent -- for instance -- making money or having some recreation or whatever). Wait, that's three things. And did I mention an almost fanatical devotion to the pope? >>>There was only little improvement of less than 50 elo from shredder7.04 to >>>shredder9 when the improvement from shredder9 to rybka1.2 is probably going to >>>be more than 100 elo. >> >>Fruit from 0.98 to 2.2.1 is about 300 Elo in less than 2 years. > >This is irrelevant because I compare with the top programs and not with an old >version. It might be irrelevant, but it is also pretty incredible. It was a hot steam-roller right out of the box. And in the short time span, he turned it into a towering juggernaut. >>I guess that in 2 years more Fabien can add 150 more if he wants to put in the >>effort. > >I agree but my point is not about future fruit but about comparing the progress >today and in the past. > >Today it is clear that there is a bigger progress. It's not clear to me. I think that the biggest jump ever was pre-deep blue to deep blue. Everything else has been a tiny blip by comparison. But that's not a fair comparison because they had a huge and talented team with a huge budget and spent huge time and resources. Nobody can compete with that. Except maybe Hydra. Not sure about Hydra, though. They have already spent a big pile, that's clear.
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.