The Internet World Computer Chess Championship

[Rolf]

Peter Skinner, please allow me the question in what relation you consider yourself standing to Robert Hyatt? Are you part of the Crafty team and in what way did you participate in the panel? Are you a chess programmer yourself? Please give some details if possible. I dont want to blame you at all, it's that I just didnt know your relation with Bob until now. Also I dont ask you for financial implications. It's a question of your ability of being independent. The only detail I could find is your fatherhood which is a completely different matter that has nothing to do with computerchess. Thanks for your input.

Hi Rolf,

Well I consider myself a friend of Robert Hyatt, and yes I am part of the Crafty team (7 years now?). In fact I just spoke to Robert on the phone about 10 days ago. For the most part Robert and Tracy Regal do the programming, I test and compile Windows releases for those that can't do it themselves. I know how to read source code, make changes.. Just because I am part of the Crafty team doesn't mean I share the exact same views of Robert. We are both adults and we agree to disagree at times. I accept his opinion and he accepts mine.

I've tried in the past to make my own engine, but never succeeded. It's not a trivial thing to do by any means, which is why I respect the authors themselves. It takes patience, vast amount of trial and error, which are not two of my best traits.

I participated in the panel like everyone else. I looked at the evidence presented, informed an opinion based on that evidence, and submitted my vote. I was asked to join the panel initially by Harvey, I accepted, and over time I pitched in when and where I could. I believe the panel made the correct decision based on the evidence, but also believe that Rybka 3+ would have to be considered clean or an original engine. I don't support the lifetime ban imposed on Vas, as I believe that to be very harsh.

Based on the ICGA decision, I went back through the CCT events and removed titles from Rybka that would have been attributed to Rybka versions 2.3.2a and earlier. This is all public information however, as I have stated these exact things on this board many times.

As for financial information. I make _zero_ money from computer chess. Being Crafty is free, we are not paid for helping with the project, and I wouldn't accept money for doing it. Messing around with the Crafty code and chatting with the group during testing/tournaments is really one of the simple pleasures I enjoy in my life. Computer Chess in general has been a hobby of mine since I was 12 yrs old. I run my own business here in Canada, which is how I support myself and my children.

Anything else?

Peter

Honestly, this is another example for the astonishing openess that is so typical for your continent. It's always like a refreshing wind of clarity compared to the secrecy of the people in Old Europe. As a lifelong consumer of mystery novels the only question left for me as a typical suspicious mind: since Harvey is not really a friend of yours it's a bit contradicting for me why exactly he could invite you for the panel since you are such an independent thinker. Didnt you feel like being asked for supporting the rather small exploited troops against Vas? didnt you suspise that you could become a helpless member of a brigade of private justice?

[Peter Skinner]

Honestly, this is another example for the astonishing openess that is so typical for your continent. It's always like a refreshing wind of clarity compared to the secrecy of the people in Old Europe. As a lifelong consumer of mystery novels the only question left for me as a typical suspicious mind: since Harvey is not really a friend of yours it's a bit contradicting for me why exactly he could invite you for the panel since you are such an independent thinker. Didnt you feel like being asked for supporting the rather small exploited troops against Vas? didnt you suspise that you could become a helpless member of a brigade of private justice?

The issues between Harvey and I only started a few months ago. Prior to that we spoke on Windows Live Messenger frequently.

I was invited to the group due to the fact I was part of the Crafty team, and I am the TD for the CCT events. At no time did I feel I was being pushed into thinking anything other than my own opinion. As stated, I looked at the evidence, evaluated it on my own, and gave my vote when asked. For those that believe certain people pushed others into making a guilty verdict; it didn't happen.

The group has several people who abstained from voting, I didn't. I shared my opinion on the matter and moved forward. I am also part of the panel for Loop and Thinker. I will look at the evince provided, evaluate it, and render a decision. Simple as that. I am not interested in the political side of computer chess at all.

Peter

[Rebel]

Peter, next time ask them if Rybka / Houdini were 200-300 elo weaker than theirs if they would give the same answer.

Yes, absolutely, in the same was as any other engine on the ICGA banned list.

You speak on behalf of SMK, Amir and Uniacke?

Believe it or not, the I**A is not the central issue this time, sroll up.

If there is any banning necessary it would be the word I**A in the main forum, we have a separate sub-forum for that.

[Harvey Williamson]

Peter, next time ask them if Rybka / Houdini were 200-300 elo weaker than theirs if they would give the same answer.

Yes, absolutely, in the same was as any other engine on the ICGA banned list.

You speak on behalf of SMK, Amir and Uniacke?

Believe it or not, the I**A is not the central issue this time, sroll up.

If there is any banning necessary it would be the word I**A in the main forum, we have a separate sub-forum for that.

Please can a mod confirm if Ed is correct and that 'ICGA' is banned word here?

[Rolf]

Honestly, this is another example for the astonishing openess that is so typical for your continent. It's always like a refreshing wind of clarity compared to the secrecy of the people in Old Europe. As a lifelong consumer of mystery novels the only question left for me as a typical suspicious mind: since Harvey is not really a friend of yours it's a bit contradicting for me why exactly he could invite you for the panel since you are such an independent thinker. Didnt you feel like being asked for supporting the rather small exploited troops against Vas? didnt you suspise that you could become a helpless member of a brigade of private justice?

The issues between Harvey and I only started a few months ago. Prior to that we spoke on Windows Live Messenger frequently.

I was invited to the group due to the fact I was part of the Crafty team, and I am the TD for the CCT events. At no time did I feel I was being pushed into thinking anything other than my own opinion. As stated, I looked at the evidence, evaluated it on my own, and gave my vote when asked. For those that believe certain people pushed others into making a guilty verdict; it didn't happen.

The group has several people who abstained from voting, I didn't. I shared my opinion on the matter and moved forward. I am also part of the panel for Loop and Thinker. I will look at the evince provided, evaluate it, and render a decision. Simple as that. I am not interested in the political side of computer chess at all.

Peter

The absence of any form of defense for Vas didnt bother you?

[Peter Skinner]

The absence of any form of defense for Vas didnt bother you?

Not at all. Vas was given ample opportunities to defend himself and chose not to. How does one expect a defense if the author himself doesn't want to participate?

Opportunity presented and declined. We moved forward. In _any_ court system, if the defense doesn't show up or refuses to participate, the court moves on usually finding for the plaintiff by default. We didn't do that. Evidence was presented and we voted based on that evidence. Some voted not guilty if I remember correctly or chose to abstain.

I didn't. I looked at the evidence and made my decision. I stand by that decision to this very day as I have made my feelings _very_ clear on the subject.

Peter

[geots]

It's even more bizarre if you know that I have repeatedly and consistently shown a complete lack of interest to participate in Peter's tournaments. See what I wrote at the bottom of page 1 of this thread.

As far as I can see Peter is just using Houdini to raise some interest for the tournament through controversy, "polls" or unverifiable claims that some author(s) would refuse to play if engine A, B or C would be allowed or not allowed.

Just play your tournament in peace, I'll try to avoid that week-end for the Houdini 3 release .

Robert

Unverifiable? Really?

I think it is pretty clear what some authors would choose if you did compete. Hiarcs, Junior, Shredder wouldn't compete.

Here is a sample email I get:

Code: Select all

Hello Peter,
 
Hope you are well?
 
I just wanted to find out if you are accepting clones or derivatives for the world internet championship tourney?
 
Regards
 
XXXXXXXXXXXX

Or

Code: Select all

Hi Peter,

Unfortunately we won't be participating due to the inclusion of derivatives. If we wanted to play Ivanhoe, Robolitto, Fire, Strelka, Houdini, Rybka, or Ippolit, we could do that on a Sunday afternoon locally.

We only have interest in participating with original authors.

Thank you for the invitation we must decline.

XXXXXXXXXXXX

I'm not using Houdini to gain anything. It is a pain in my ass and quite frankly I wish you would go away. I know that won't happen because you see $$$$ just waiting to be taken from the users here.

Peter

I don't doubt for a minute they sent you those messages. But what they actually meant was that they are old school, and they have no chance ag. engines like Houdini, Rybka and Ivanhoe. They don't see the point of playing an engine that beat Deep Junior 13 56- 6 in a match at 40/40. Hiarcs would do worse and Shredder- not much better. They know they will get their butts handed to them- so I certainly don't blame them. Maybe you could have a "B Class" for them to play in.


gts

[CRoberson]

Since you mention 70% I am not sure if don't have it backwards. The higher the percentage of move similarity the more likely a derivative or a clone with only few changes. I suggest you have a look at the table with the dark red, red and orange colours, a sorted list of very likely clones and derivatives. That's what similarity tester can do for you.

http://www.top-5000.nl/clone.htm

As to your question, a 55% similarity is safe.

Then that number is what I will use to determine eligibility.

I must disagree a wee bit. Adam adjusted the time per position for the programs with some as much as 9x longer than the fastest one. A clone wouldn't need such an adjustment. His method makes sense in the respect of finding those with very similar position evaluators, but not for the rest of the program.

Such a method would miss clones/derivatives that reuse all of the program except the position evaluator.

So, it is just one indicator/flag of a certain type of cheating.