On to the next (non-)scandal... Critter & Ippo

[Jeremy Bernstein]

From Kai Laskos: http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=39577

I probably shouldn't say anything, but I've seen the Critter 1.2 code and I don't think there's anything (at all) to this. Just another illustration of the limitations of this particular technique of "clone detection".

Jeremy

[magnumpi]

maybe this is a new pastime for BB+?

[Quocvuong82]

Yes, I see version 1.2 is very similar to Ippo*

[veritas]

PostPost subject: Re: Critter 1.2 SEEMS to be a member of the Ippo family Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:37 pm Reply to topic Reply with quote
Hi, Kai

1) Hunting for some publicity, eh? Smile

2) Do you know what exactly is measured with sim03?

3) I will tell you a "secret". Houdini, Robbolito, Ippolit, etc. share same piece square tables. While the ones that Critter uses are not 100% identical but are very very close (differences are just because of rounding errors - Critter uses 1/256th of a pawn instead of 1/100 - for every practical purpose they can be called identical... they are working fine, and there are more reasonable ways to spend development time than to make them different just to make someone happy). I don't know about your programming skills but let's try an experiment: Take 2 different open source programs (let's say Crafty & Fruit) and force them to use the same exact PSQ tables. Now run them through sim03 and see the shocking result (and write a sensational post on a forum of your choice about one being a clone of the other...)

4) Sources of Critter are not top-secret. Although after version 0.42 I choose to go closed source, so far I have sent my sources to everyone who asked for them. Most of such requests concerned version 0.90, but a few people on this forum do have sources of v1.2 too (or the last beta before v1.2 release).

Richard

[noctiferus]

IMHO, Kai did some very interestig work on similarities.

Without entering in similarity detection software, I would like to compare his results with another clustering softw, and compare other engines under different metrics, aside from average linkage (of course nothing similar to deep analysis by BB+ ).

I hope to get data from him:
http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 7&start=10

[kingliveson]

From Kai Laskos: http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=39577

I probably shouldn't say anything, but I've seen the Critter 1.2 code and I don't think there's anything (at all) to this. Just another illustration of the limitations of this particular technique of "clone detection".

Jeremy

This came up slightly a while back and I never thought there was anything to it. Someone who is trying to hide something does not send his source to various people who have asked -- so this is much ado about nothing.

[Jeremy Bernstein]

From Kai Laskos: http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=39577

I probably shouldn't say anything, but I've seen the Critter 1.2 code and I don't think there's anything (at all) to this. Just another illustration of the limitations of this particular technique of "clone detection".

Jeremy

This came up slightly a while back and I never thought there was anything to it. Someone who is trying to hide something does not send his source to various people who have asked -- so this is much ado about nothing.

Richard is a good programmer, and a straightforward, open person who has been very forthcoming and patient with the questions that have arisen from time to time. I simply think that this tool is inadequate as a "clone detector".

Jeremy

[tomgdrums]

From Kai Laskos: http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=39577

I probably shouldn't say anything, but I've seen the Critter 1.2 code and I don't think there's anything (at all) to this. Just another illustration of the limitations of this particular technique of "clone detection".

Jeremy

This came up slightly a while back and I never thought there was anything to it. Someone who is trying to hide something does not send his source to various people who have asked -- so this is much ado about nothing.

Richard is a good programmer, and a straightforward, open person who has been very forthcoming and patient with the questions that have arisen from time to time. I simply think that this tool is inadequate as a "clone detector".

Jeremy

I agree 100%. Richard is very open and always answers questions in a very straight forward manner. (unlike Houdart)

And as someone else has said, since Richard has sent his source code to various people it is hard to see where he has anything to hide.

I think some people are just lashing out now. And I also think that the Sim tool is wholly inadequate as a "clone detector."