To put everything into place with Strelka

[Sergei Markoff]

Ok, please tell me about your practise work in this cases.

If you analyzing a game played by Movei and you're walking through new variants to look on what happend there , maybe changing stuff in search, doing the same again and again and again. You know what i mean how this process works

How do you do that ?

Simply using search with infinite (or almost infinite) time.

[Daniel Mehrmann]

Ok, please tell me about your practise work in this cases.

If you analyzing a game played by Movei and you're walking through new variants to look on what happend there , maybe changing stuff in search, doing the same again and again and again. You know what i mean how this process works

How do you do that ?

Simply using search with infinite (or almost infinite) time.

infinite == analyze

Then you need to support a lot of WB2 commands like "?", "force", "undo" during running search...

A lazy boy, like me, i'm lazy as well , would not add it because it more complicated as the easy analyze run

I don't know much about you, but it seems that you're not a brother of "Mr. Spock"

But its ok of course, its just a choose of taste.

Best whishes,
Daniel

ps: My engine has a different handling between analyze mode and infinite search btw (most common technical stuff), so i wouldn't get same results...

[Sergei Markoff]

But its ok of course, its just a choose of taste.

I know that Strelka has EPD support. And also it shows full PV including quiescence. Unless SmarThink Strelka don't retrieves PV from transposition table. Osipov used a lot of "manual" techniques in his work. For example, instead of using profilers he included profiling tech into engine itself. Don't forget that Osipov started with chess programming about 25 years ago when thare aren't winboard and so on.

[ed]

Hi Sergei,

I know it's unfair every strong new chess program to undergo this humiliating procedure. I guess you understand why this is. In the interest of our new rising star I ask you to simply accept the not_so_nice procedure and finalize it till the critics are satisfied.

Why?

Unfortunately to be successful in this circus of playing strength it is decisive to be recognized and accepted as an unique engine else the programmer and its engine will be hunted forever as a possible clone, take my word for it. I doubt any programmer to want such a thing that to happen to him/her.

So consider your options. I think it is important the programmer to clarify the situation as soon as possible before the bad news spread there is a new clone with the name Strelka. Making yourself a reputation is the work of years, gossip can break a good reputation to no repair within days.

Just a well meant advice.

Regards,

Ed

There is no need for theatre like your photo.

I trust Dann Corbit and many programmers in here would agree with that. He would like to know I'm sure as well.

Thank you for such a direct answer. I'll remeber it.

Now you know what you must do.

I always know what I must do and don't need any parental advisory.
Thank you for advice anyway.

[Volker Pittlik]

... I think it's possible to find other bitboard engines with similar behavior. Probably it caused by the specific of board representation and move stuff....

Crafty does not fail:

Code: Select all

Crafty v20.14 (1 cpus)

White(1): setboard rnbkkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBKKBNR w KQkq - 0 1
...
White(1): analyze
              time surplus   0.00  time limit 29.83 (+0.00) (3:28)
              depth   time  score   variation (1)
                8->   0.26   0.05   1. Nc3 Nc6 2. e4 Nf6 3. Bd3 e5 4. Nb5
                                    Kd8 <HT>
                9     0.33   0.21   1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nf3 e5 3. e4 Nb4 4. Kd1
                                    Bd6 5. Bc4
                9->   0.39   0.21   1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nf3 e5 3. e4 Nb4 4. Kd1
                                    Bd6 5. Bc4
...

                                    Nb4 5. Bd3 b5 6. Nf3 Bb7 7. O-O Nf6
                                    8. Ng5 Ke8 9. e5 Nxd3 10. cxd3
               19    16&#58;01   0.14   1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nb5 Kd8 3. e4 a6 4. Nc3
                                    Nb4 5. Kd1 Nf6 6. a3 Ng4 7. Nh3 Nc6
                                    8. d3 Nd4 9. f3 Ne5 10. Nf4
               19->  24&#58;09   0.14   1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nb5 Kd8 3. e4 a6 4. Nc3
                                    Nb4 5. Kd1 Nf6 6. a3 Ng4 7. Nh3 Nc6
                                    8. d3 Nd4 9. f3 Ne5 10. Nf4
               20    29&#58;11   0.14   1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nb5 Kd8 3. e4 a6 4. Nc3
                                    Nf6 5. Nf3 Nb4 6. Bd3 Nxd3+ 7. cxd3
                                    d6 8. O-O Bg4 9. Ng5 Ke8 10. Nd5 Nxd5
                                    11. exd5
White&#40;1&#41;&#58; quit

Therefore I think the similarity can not be explained by speculations about the nature of bitboards.

In general I'm not very interested in engines which does not support Linux. Therefore I would prefer if now someone else would look for another program with the same property as Strelka and Rybka.

Volker

[Gerd Isenberg]

I don't know much about you, but it seems that you're not a brother of "Mr. Spock"

But its ok of course, its just a choose of taste.

Best whishes,
Daniel

There are engines without any winboard/uci protocols implemented but propritary procedural interfaces etc...

I don't like this kind of social chauvinism like this:

I don't know much about you, but it seems that you're not a brother of Michael Ehrig

But its ok of course, its just a choose of taste.

Best whishes,
Gerd

[Rolf]

Hi Sergei,

I know it's unfair every strong new chess program to undergo this humiliating procedure. I guess you understand why this is. In the interest of our new rising star I ask you to simply accept the not_so_nice procedure and finalize it till the critics are satisfied.

Why?

Unfortunately to be successful in this circus of playing strength it is decisive to be recognized and accepted as an unique engine else the programmer and its engine will be hunted forever as a possible clone, take my word for it. I doubt any programmer to want such a thing that to happen to him/her.

So consider your options. I think it is important the programmer to clarify the situation as soon as possible before the bad news spread there is a new clone with the name Strelka. Making yourself a reputation is the work of years, gossip can break a good reputation to no repair within days.

Just a well meant advice.

Regards,

Ed

Now if it is the good tradition to humiliate people and join in mean gossip to break the good reputation without chance to repair it's time to stop with such a good tradition. Why should a Russian trust the neutrality of an American expert? After what happened to Kasparov who was psyched out although he had been invited as a special guest by IBM and the DB team?

Honestly Ed, think yourself for a minute, assumed that this Strelka author is a new genius, why should he risk that his new ideas could be spread in the USA?

I read that real experts (I recall a message from Chrilly about Rybka) could always decrypt and understand the details of another program - so why dont you go ahead? Although Chrilly wrote that he wouldnt do such things. So basically Sergei was correct that he felt being put under a mild parental guidance. Ed, honestly, is this the style you would want to be treated?

Here is my MORAL to the topic:

Why not eagerly waiting on such a new talent and greeting him with all sincerity? If he's sound and really a new collegue then everything is fine. If he's a betrayer, a fake or whatever, why not then letting the negative facts speak for itself? But every personal push or also anxiousness by proven and outstanding experts out of our midst is insulting to these persons themselves. In science a fake is reveiled soon enough but that doesnt change the general hospitality of scientists towards possible newcomers. You simply lose too much for your own standards if you take part in anything like a man-hunt.

A sound position in your eyes? Hope so.

[ed]

In an honest world you are absolutely right.

Compare the situation you going for high placed position in society, I am sure you would not object your credentials are checked, a normal and general accepted procedure. Your future boss wouldn't hire you if you have a criminal record. And so it is in this case. The past has shown too much betray and a checking procedure is needed to keep the computer chess community clean.

In Cologne 1986 I had to hand over my sources to the ballotage commission in order to enter the WCCC. It was not funny, but hey, not the end of the world either.

Ed

[GenoM]

hey all

Osipov made free engine. He gave it to all of us for free. He does not owe nothing to us. Cristopher, he doesn't owe you anything too.

Lets calm down, lets show more respect to Sergei Markoff and to all KasparovChess forum -- there are no cloners there, my friend so choose your words more precisely.

My 2 cents. Rolf is right.

[Christopher Conkie]

hey all

Osipov made free engine. He gave it to all of us for free. He does not owe nothing to us. Cristopher, he doesn't owe you anything too.

Lets calm down, lets show more respect to Sergei Markoff and to all KasparovChess forum -- there are no cloners there, my friend so choose your words more precisely.

My 2 cents. Rolf is right.

Some are think they are "immortal" but I know that everyone dies one day........

http://kasparovchess.crestbook.com/view ... d=1629&p=9

I assume you were joking Evgenii.....right? Cloners are rife in there.

Regards

Christopher