New engine: Ippolit

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Harvey Williamson, bob

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Locked
User avatar
WinPooh
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 7:01 am
Contact:

New engine: Ippolit

Post by WinPooh » Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:29 am

Links removed by Moderation

Steve

User avatar
Eelco de Groot
Posts: 3859
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:40 am
Location: Groningen

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by Eelco de Groot » Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:37 am

Sorry, but there are doubts about this being "new"and in fact being an illegal clone of Rybka. I think linking to this will not be allowed on the forum.

Eelco
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first
place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you
are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan

User avatar
WinPooh
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 7:01 am
Contact:

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by WinPooh » Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:52 am

Eelco de Groot wrote:Sorry, but there are doubts about this being "new"and in fact being an illegal clone of Rybka. I think linking to this will not be allowed on the forum.

Eelco
Could you please provide some reliable proof of this engine being a clone, besides "there are doubts" and "I think"?
Statistical correlational analysis, source code analysis, pv output, something else?
Sorry if this question has already been discussed here, today is the first day I read about this engine.
Last edited by WinPooh on Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Michael Diosi
Posts: 671
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:37 am

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by Michael Diosi » Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:55 am

Hi,

This is not new, at least for people who real know something about computer chess. All who read previous posts and can read between the lines can confirm this. The sourcecode is buggy and needs to be corrected for the engine to run properly, eventhough the displayed PV look strange :)

I am sure Harvey won't complain about this one. He is still busy letting Fritz 12 calculating the mate in one mentioned one week ago...

Michael
[URL]http://www.playwitharena.com[(URL]

User avatar
Eelco de Groot
Posts: 3859
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:40 am
Location: Groningen

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by Eelco de Groot » Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:00 am

It has been discussed Vladimir but as we would rather not draw attention to it, none of the discussions are still there. Maybe it will be possible to discuss an engine XXXX but certainly not like this. I have not inspected the sources, I am not a programmer and I believe a lot is in Russian, but other programmers here have pointed out this engine is based on Rybka, I have reason to suspect illegally obtained Rybka sources.

I don't know specific details and I don't think I have to know them; maybe the author of Rybka will be available for more authoritative comments on this, if he would care to comment but probably not in a public forum.

Eelco
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first
place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you
are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan

Steve B
Posts: 3697
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 2:26 pm
Contact:

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by Steve B » Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:12 am

WinPooh wrote:
Eelco de Groot wrote:Sorry, but there are doubts about this being "new"and in fact being an illegal clone of Rybka. I think linking to this will not be allowed on the forum.

Eelco
Could you please provide some reliable proof of this engine being a clone, besides "there are doubts" and "I think"?
Statistical correlational analysis, source code analysis, pv output, something else?
Sorry if this question has already been discussed here, today is the first day I read about this engine.
Discussion about the Engine and its originality are perfectly acceptable but links to an engine when reasonable doubt exits in the Chess Computer community regarding its originality are not
Moderation has edited the links out of your initial post
please do not post them again

Regards
Steve

User avatar
WinPooh
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 7:01 am
Contact:

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by WinPooh » Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:20 am

OK, thanks for clarifying.
please do not post them again
I will not. I hope, however, that posting the word "Google" is not yet prohibited by computer chess community :)

Sean Evans
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: Canada

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by Sean Evans » Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:36 am

Hi, what is the evidence that Ippolit is a clone of Rybka?

It is a serious charge if true, as Rybka is a commercial program and the individual could be sued!

Cordially,

Sean

User avatar
mclane
Posts: 14967
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:40 pm
Location: germany
Contact:

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by mclane » Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:49 am

this all reminds me on the scenes from medieval where the heretic was burning at stake and the bishop in front asked him: will you confess that you are a sinner ?

i have heard that XY is together with satan.
oh i have the suspicion that x is a witch and can fly on a broom.
did you see it ? no but somebody told me about it.

ok. lets burn the witch and see if she confesses her sin.

in all those discussion i have not seen much evidence.
only imaginations or suspicious positions and main lines.

even the people who have seen source code do not
come with clear statements.
What seems like a fairy tale today may be reality tomorrow.
Here we have a fairy tale of the day after tomorrow....

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 22337
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: New engine: Ippolit

Post by hgm » Sun Oct 18, 2009 12:23 pm

WinPooh wrote:Could you please provide some reliable proof of this engine being a clone, besides "there are doubts" and "I think"?
Statistical correlational analysis, source code analysis, pv output, something else?
Sorry if this question has already been discussed here, today is the first day I read about this engine.
The reliable proof is the rating, not? A person that never released an engine before enters the scene with a rating of 3200+. What could be more conclusive proof? Even if I had seen him retyping the code of a top engine with my own eyes, there would still be reasonable doubt that he could type well enough to qualify it as a clone. But the rating makes it a certainty.

Or do you doubt the rating is what it is claimed to be?

Locked