Similarity tests

[Adam Hair]

Note:the great Don Dailey's view: +60% sim results can be considered as clones

I doubt that Don ever expressed that opinion.

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi Sedat,

I have a bit for you
Read it but I am sure you have no interest to read?!

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47045
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=27416

Perhaps you can build an other understanding.
To 100 or 200 Elo more or less ...

But if you want more of such information, please let me know ... I collect a list full of such threads.

If you like to play with Rybka and Houdini ... do it, fully OK for me. Each one can do what he want.

For me is important:

ABSOLUTELY THE FIRST POINT OF ALL VIEWS ...
The readme file ...
Again and again ...
I am using sources by ... thanks Fabian
I am using sources by ... thanks Tord
I am using sources by ... thanks Bob
The following parts are from myself ...
a) ...
b) ...

At second ...
What the programmer do with the sources ...

At third ...
Sources must be free again if free sources by others are used!

If not ...
100 or 200 Elo more ...
Without any proofs to an own work ...

I don't give a shit about that!
Hope that is clearly enough for yourself!

You have to compare Rybka 1 with Fruit 2.1.
32 Versions of 1.x are available.
Compare it version for version ...

Discuss ended for myself!
Or I have to write 10times more the same stuff.

I have build my opinion to that topic.
If others have an other opinion ... OK for me.

Best
Frank

[Sedat Canbaz]

Note:the great Don Dailey's view: +60% sim results can be considered as clones

I doubt that Don ever expressed that opinion.

About Don's comment,
It was a few years ago, but as far as I remember 60% and above can be considered as non-original engines

Btw, do you remember your views about origins ? (during our private comments ?)

Best,
Sedat

[Sedat Canbaz]

Hello Frank,

Yes...I read your published links (not all of course..but some of them)...thanks

But I could not find any recommendation by Fabien, Tord, Bob regarding Fire and Critter should be tested...

Or maybe I am missing something )) ?!

Best,
Sedat

[Frank Quisinsky]

Sedat,

possible that I add in my tourney a derivative engine in the future!!

If I can see a good readme file ... sources are free available. Style is an other, own ideas are great to understand, also for non programmers. I must each time asked by mail if I not understand details. I have the luck that different programmers help me a bit in the past. Today I understand many things in programming, more as in wb times ... but I am looking more in my stats and in the style I found out, I like that ... what a tester can do.

I am tester, not a programmer ...
To create an interesting list isn't easy without more knowledge about programming. In the past I tested Houdini and Rybka too. Readers asked me again and again (from my Webpage in SWCR1 times). I had fun with different IvanHoe versions, yes! I had fun with Houdini and the nice tactical moves in a lot of games, yes. I had fun in the past with Rybka and the strong endgame, yes.

But again and again I have the same problem Sedat!
I am thinking on all the programmers, develops with own ideas computer chess history.

Today it is very important to protect important works.
So many programmers used the work by Fabien but I never read it. I am not happy about it what we do with that great programmer in the past.

EXPLOITED

Programmers used sources by others ... OK for me.
But it must be available as information in the readme, webpage or better documentation.

If not ...
The chaos we have today will be bigger and bigger and Computer chess will be lost more and more honest people. We should work on it to win all the persons we lost back. I will read Dan Corbit, Patrick Buchmann, James Ablet and and and ... the list will never ended.

I am sure that the Houdini programmer is very talented and also Vas. But both should be play with open cards and the works from others should be respected.

For 10 years never I must write such things ...
Ok we found different clones to Crafty, Pepito, others ...
Each one respect the work an other one do.

That is history if I am looking what is happen today.

Best
Frank

Example:
What Zach do ... very complicated for me.
Saved it on my hard disk. In times, nothing to do ... I try to understand. I am looking often in that files. I am to old to start with programming are in my brain ... closed it. Weeks later ... I open the same stuff. Try to understand ... and closed it. Not easy for me! So you can see I am to each point honest in that what I wrote here. I have no Problems to give an answere to that what I do in the past. Not all was good, made a lot of mistakes ... but never, never, never I would used a work by an other without to give the Information ... Hey, that idea is from x and that idea is from y. I am a German and German people don't have a good call. We have to thinking what we do in the past. I think that German's should go with a good example in front to the others ... perhaps we can repair a bit. Often I am very disappointed if I see we learned nothing ... if I see what others do.

[Sedat Canbaz]

Its ok dear Frank...

Just I'd like point out over this issue,
You already started testing Rybkanian derivatives (Critter,Fire) !

And it a good idea by your side that you plan to include more ...
Otherwise there will be injustice to rest derivatives creators too

But however,
I will prefer SCCT rules


Good luck,
Sedat

[Frank Quisinsky]

Dear Sedat,

at first ...
A lot of hard words by myself but you never lost your Niveau.
WOW, you are really a ncie guy.
My compliment and sorry if my words are to hard.

Critter is an own work Sedat ...
Sources by Critter was sent to a lot of other programmers.
The only problem I have with Critter are the last versions.
I don't know why the programmer of Critter do that.

I am sure sooner or later Richard come back.
That is quiet clear for me.

And to Fire.
A nice text wrote Norman today (a bit history for youself).

Please don't speak from Rybkanian ... speak from Fruitologian!
That is more right, set your startpoint on the right position in your views. Do it for yourself. Respect the work Fabian do ... that is more important as to respect the work Vas do with the work from Fabian.

Working on your rules.
It is important what you do ... for me and I am sure for a lot of others. To give Rybka to many attention is wrong.

Read the interview I made with Vas.
I am very disappointed with him, most reason are two answers in the interview I made with him.

I can't forget ...

Best
Frank

[Sedat Canbaz]

Dear Frank,

This is my last posting over this issue, because you can't see the reality

The great Don's tool does not make mistakes, so both engines (Critter and Fire) are Rybkanians, see please the similarity !!!


sim version 3
------ Rybka 3 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0) ------
61.79 RobboLito 0.085g3 w32 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
59.18 Elektro 1.0 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
58.76 Fire 3.0 x64 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
58.45 BlackMamba 2.0 x64 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
57.65 Equinox 3.20 x64mp (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
57.00 Naum 4.6 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
56.98 Murka 3 x64 UCI (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
56.48 Houdini 4 x64 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
55.12 Critter 0.90 64-bit SSE4 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
53.69 Stockfish 2.1 JA 64bit (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
53.44 Stockfish 2.1 JA 64bit (time: 50 ms scale: 1.0)
53.29 Strelka 2.0 B (time: 50 ms scale: 1.0)
52.82 Komodo64 2.03 DC (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
52.51 Stockfish 1.5 JA 64bit (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
52.10 Stockfish 1.7 JA 64bit (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
52.05 Senpai 1.0 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
51.69 Stockfish 1.7.1 JA (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
51.21 Protector 1.7.0 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
50.50 Gull 3 x64 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
50.46 Stockfish 140614 64 SSE4.2 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
49.51 MinkoChess 1.3 x64 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
48.54 Fruit 2.1 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
48.54 Bobcat 3.25 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
47.54 Daydreamer 1.75 JA (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
47.29 Octochess revision 5190 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
46.78 TwinFish 0.07 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
46.71 cheng4 0.36a (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
46.55 Rodent 1.4 (build 2) (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
46.33 Cyrano 0.6b17 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
44.32 Vajolet 2.48 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
42.33 Igorrit 0.086v8_x64 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
40.25 Booot 5.2.0(64) (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)
27.40 Arasan 17.2 (time: 100 ms scale: 1.0)



Best,
Sedat

[Frank Quisinsky]

Sedat ...
you have to compare Fruit 2.1 with Rybka 1.0 Beta ...
The start point of Rybka is most important ...

Why you set not the right start point?
Try to answer for yourself!

And to the Clone Tool ...
I will help you a bit to understand it ...

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 71&t=39577

Read it in a minute you have time.

Best
Frank

[Sedat Canbaz]

Its ok...dear Frank

I gave up...Rybka is 100 % clone, Fire is 100% original work !!

A little note:
- Rybka passes SCCT rules, where unfortunately Fire not...

Are you happy now ?)))

Btw, you should prefer older Critter versions...if you want to test Non-Rybkanian))!!



Best Wishes,
Sedat