Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 17:23:28 10/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 1999 at 04:01:32, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >You know, there has been a lot of talk about similar strings and data patterns >in the executables, but this overlooks the most obvious way to tell that a >program is cloned: how it plays. If you run it for a while on the same >positions, are the results similar? Same moves? Same depths? Same evaluations? >Perhaps similar patterns in the evaluations, indicating similar searches or >evaluation terms? Perhaps similar scores on test suites? If all this stuff is >different, then it seems like the program has been modified enough for it to be >interesting. Definitely interesting enough to be allowed at a tournament... >whether or not it should be sold is a different ethical question. If someone takes Crafty and fiddles with the eval, there is a good chance that they can make it play differently. This does not mean that they have created something new and original. I have not tried to prove it, but I believe you could make a program appear to be different by changing piece square tables and a few other eval terms, which you understand would take no effort. I argue strongly against this "playing style" method of determining program originality, because I don't want to be at a tournament where someone successfully uses this argument on the organizers. It is a bogus argument. bruce
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.