Rybka disqualified and banned from World Computer Chess Cham
Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 2:53 am
Computer Chess Club
https://talkchess.com/
Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
If the Rybka=Fruit/Crafty connection is so strong and the evidence so damning, then why did this take over 5 years to unearth? Five and a half years since December 2005! It should be noted , for whatever it’s worth , that a huge majority of the panel members who investigated and condemned Rajlich are his direct competitors, ie, authors of rival programs. These same competitors wonder why Rajlich did not give up the Rybka source code for their perusal.
As a layperson in computer matters (I am an attorney), I don’t get this at all. There is no Rybka source code to compare, so apparently various circumstantial evidence is cited. Fruit was the strongest engine. Then Rybka was the strongest engine. And yet their evaluation functions were found to overlap by 64%. Call the police! The panel points out that weaker engines had less overlap as compared to the 2 strongest engines (Fruit and Rybka). Naturally, engines that are closer to the “chess truth” will overlap more. I don’t see how an evaluation overlap of 64% is “nearly identical”. Geneticists claim that human beings share 96% of the same DNA (aka “source code”) with chimpanzees. Perhaps the ICGA will ban God from claiming that Human Beings are uniquely in His image since the ALmighty seems to have plagiarized the source code for chimpanzees when coding humans..
[Reply]
The similarity in search and eval are not very condemnatory in my view.Chan Rasjid wrote:Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
If the Rybka=Fruit/Crafty connection is so strong and the evidence so damning, then why did this take over 5 years to unearth? Five and a half years since December 2005! It should be noted , for whatever it’s worth , that a huge majority of the panel members who investigated and condemned Rajlich are his direct competitors, ie, authors of rival programs. These same competitors wonder why Rajlich did not give up the Rybka source code for their perusal.
As a layperson in computer matters (I am an attorney), I don’t get this at all. There is no Rybka source code to compare, so apparently various circumstantial evidence is cited. Fruit was the strongest engine. Then Rybka was the strongest engine. And yet their evaluation functions were found to overlap by 64%. Call the police! The panel points out that weaker engines had less overlap as compared to the 2 strongest engines (Fruit and Rybka). Naturally, engines that are closer to the “chess truth” will overlap more. I don’t see how an evaluation overlap of 64% is “nearly identical”. Geneticists claim that human beings share 96% of the same DNA (aka “source code”) with chimpanzees. Perhaps the ICGA will ban God from claiming that Human Beings are uniquely in His image since the ALmighty seems to have plagiarized the source code for chimpanzees when coding humans..
[Reply]
kinderchocolate wrote:http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/rybka ... pionships/
In case people haven't read that.
harami wrote:I feel bad for Topalov’s team. Even the software they used involved cheating ..
, and now Danailov will accuse Rajlich of Cheating too ?… LOL
( sorry could not resist )
You are wrong, it doesn't take a genius anymore to make a 3000+ engine, nowadays: it takes a slow but constant decrease in moral values. Everybody can get a >3000 Elo engine by copy/pasting from public codesource. The people you named don't do that. And it takes a lot more genius to bring a genuine engine to circa 2800 all by oneself than patching together sources from various strong engine.geots wrote:I suppose people like Bob, Theron and Zach are happy. They managed to help get rid of competition they were never smart enough to beat.