Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / IGCA investigation confirms that Vas spoke the truth
- - By SR (****) Date 2011-07-25 01:26 Edited 2011-07-25 01:29
It has often been (falsely) claimed that Vas did not give proper credit to Fruit. On http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Vasik+Rajlich I found the following quotes from 2005 (my highlights):

Interview
Quotes from an uciengines.de Interview with Vasik Rajlich, December 20, 2005  a new age in Computerchess? Two questions by Alexander Schmidt:

20. Alexander Schmidt:
The increase in playing strength of the latest chess engines is unbelieveable. We have since some time with Fruit 2.1 by Fabien Letouzey a very strong open source engine. Do you see a relation between the published sources of such a strong engine and the increase of strength in computer chess in general? How much influence do the ideas of Fruit have on the future of computerchess?

Vasik Rajlich:
Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake: Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.

It is a bit of a pity that Rybka won't make the same contribution to the computer chess community, but at the moment I must also think about protecting my secrets. It's the eternal struggle for a computer chess programmer.

21. Alexander Schmidt:
We had our first contact when I had questions about a similarity to Fruit in the search, others found similarities in the evaluation. Some people where a little bit suspicious that Rybka could be a clone of the open source engine. In the meantime it is clear that Rybka is no clone but you used ideas of Fruit (I guess all other serious engine programmers had a look at Fruit too). How strong would Rybka actually be if the Fruit code would have never been published?

Vasik Rajlich:
It's a good question. I don't want to get too specific about which ideas from Fruit I think are really useful, but they fall into two categories:

1) Very specific tricks, mostly related to search.
2) Philosophy of the engine (and in particular of the search).

Fruit could really hardly be more useful along both of these dimensions. Fabien is a very good engineer, and also has a very clear and simple conception of how his search should behave.

Anyway, if I really had to give a number - my wild guess is that Rybka would be 20 rating points weaker had Fruit not appeared.
Parent - - By SR (****) Date 2011-07-25 01:59 Edited 2011-07-25 02:03
Disgrace that Vas gets a life ban after an investigation which only confirms what Vas made no secret of 2005.
Parent - - By Capa (***) Date 2011-07-25 02:25
I recall posting this exact link about 3 years ago when I was having a discussion with the former Vytron. He seemed to be oblivious of any Rybka-Fruit relation and so I posted it. I assumed that it was common knowledge that Vas had used Fruit code. This was something that I knew previous to joining this forum. Back then if you just googled Rybka/Fruit you could find quite a bit of stuff on this precise subject. In fact, that is how I found the link years ago. Of course, Vas is clearly low-balling when he estimates a 20 eli gain.
When the ICGA came out with this info it really wasn't a surprise I assume for most of us. The only surprise was the Crafty connection, which I had never heard and, of course, the supposed extent of the copying.
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-07-25 07:04

> The only surprise was the Crafty connection, which I had never heard


Just like many people didn't hear about Rybka 1.6.1.

I actually would like to hear Vas on that, would he say "I went through the Crafty 19 source code forwards and backwards and took most of it"?
Parent - - By Capa (***) Date 2011-07-25 21:03
Uly, por qué cambiaste de nombre?
No question about the Fruit-Rybka connection---even Vas admits it. I also would like to hear from Vas about Crafty. I assume that he would say essentially the same thing, that he looked at it thoroughly and what he "took" from it he assumed was legal.
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-07-26 00:21

> Uly, por qué cambiaste de nombre?


My real life name is Uly, so I guess the question would be "why did I use the Vytron nick for so long?"

As soon as my friends found out my real name was Ulysses/Ulises, they started calling me Uly, and it got viral. It eventually became very confusing having people calling me Vytron and others calling me Uly, and I got fed up with it. I couldn't ask my friends to stop calling me Uly (nothing wrong about that, since that's how I'm called in real life) so the solution was to stop other people from calling me Vytron, which turned out to be as easy as changing my nick to Uly.

Nowadays, fewer and fewer people call me Vytron, so it's working.
Parent - By Capa (***) Date 2011-07-26 01:36
:)
Parent - - By Geomusic (*****) Date 2011-07-27 02:42
LOL say my name 10 times fast.
Parent - - By TheHug (Bronze) Date 2011-07-27 02:51
I have a hard enough time trying to say it once. Glad you didn't play in the WBCCC your name would be impossible for me to do in my videos I'm trying to do. :lol:
Parent - By RFK (Gold) Date 2011-07-27 04:56 Edited 2011-07-27 05:02
The translation is easy -

"Hummingbird on the Left" "Left-Handed Hummingbird"

When I was power pedaling in Boulder, Colorado along the bike trails - this would have fit in nicely -coming up on someone you would call out " on your left"  or "on you right"  with this handle it would be " Hummingbird on the left" - of course by the time you got it out you'd probably have run someone down.
Parent - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-07-27 08:03
HuiHuiHuiHuiHuiHuiHuiHuiHuiHui.

Easy.
Parent - By M ANSARI (*****) Date 2011-07-27 11:56
I agree, it is very silly.  What ICGA report is trying to say is that Vas never gave any credit to anyone that helped get Rybka started.  He clearly stated many times that he looked at all available free source code as well as papers or anything and everything that had anything to do with writing a chess engine.  Even in Rybka 1.0 beta there was clear mention of how much he gained from Fruit and Vas never tried to "hide" the fact that he went through Fruit and took a lot of things.  That is, after all, what free source code is for.
Parent - - By Watchman (***) Date 2011-07-25 02:21
Nice of you to repost this Søren.

However, this is VERY OLD NEWS for anyone with any serious involvement in computer chess...

If you had done what I said... and looked at the article I pointed you to by van den Herik, you would know an interview here... an readme file there... means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for ICGA purposes.

So sure, continue to embarrass yourself with irrelevant posts like the above.
Parent - - By SR (****) Date 2011-07-25 02:25
If you had done what I said... and looked at the article I pointed you to by van den Herik, you would know an interview here.

Could you provide me with a link to Van den Herik's article. I did not manage to find it....
Parent - - By Watchman (***) Date 2011-07-25 02:36
yes sir I can...

Herik, H.J. van den (2006). The interpretation of rules: Editorial. ICGA Journal, 29(2), 53-54.  http://arno.uvt.nl/show.cgi?fid=106994

Downloaded from the following list: http://publications.uvt.nl/repository/h.j.vdnherik/publications.html
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2011-07-25 03:26
Very interesting the Big Lion case in that paper.
Parent - - By Watchman (***) Date 2011-07-25 06:42
Yes...

The Lion++ 1.5 case shows how something similar was dealt with FIVE years ago...

Squarknll and its author booted permanently in 2010.

so the idea of Vas being picked on by ICGA or any other of these nonsense ideas about ICGA being unfair...

is just that... nonsense.

Plus when you look at the size and scope of this investigation... makes these accusations all the more ridiculous.
Parent - By Watchman (***) Date 2011-07-25 07:18
Yes thanks Søren,

My point with that case was again...

1)non-original work
2)deception / deceiving ICGA
3)resulting punishment (both author and program permanently banned)
Parent - - By SR (****) Date 2011-07-25 02:23
From: "Vasik Rajlich"
To: "Sven Schüle"
Subject: Re: Request for your comments on computer chess topic
Date: Sat, 12. Jun 2010 08:32:19

Hi Sven,

yes, these fun topics.

Ippolit is disassembled Rybka 3 with changes. The changes are considerable but not even close to enough to leave any doubt. Robbolito is an evolved Ippolit, with more changes and more cleanup. I haven't checked the other new engines yet.

I'll definitely write up the Ippolit case at some point, for the historical record. Anonymous engines are not accepted by the CC community, so there is no hurry. I think it's best to wait one to two years before writing up an anonymous engine. Otherwise, cloners could use anonymous releases to get information, and then take more aggressive steps.

Re. tracking down the cloners: Not worth the energy, IMO.

Re. Fruit and Rybka: The Rybka source code is original. I did take a lot of things from Fruit, but legally. If there are some good concrete questions from credible people, please send them along.

Re. Rybka 3 source code: Unfortunately, I don't have it. (Yes, it was careless. I'm keeping the Rybka 4 source code.) It's not necessary for writing up the Ippolit case, but it would probably make a court case more difficult.

Best regards,
Vas
Parent - By Chess_Rambo (***) Date 2011-07-25 08:15

> If there are some good concrete questions from credible people, please send them along.
>


Sending questions is easy, getting good concrete answers is hard. :twisted:
Parent - - By Watchman (***) Date 2011-07-25 06:38
The below is quite funny...

Vasik Rajlich:
Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake: Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.

So according to him... elo jumps were "massive" :lol:

But when it comes to him...
Anyway, if I really had to give a number - my wild guess is that Rybka would be 20 rating points weaker had Fruit not appeared.

MASSIVE for "them"... just 20 elo for "me" :lol::lol::lol:

Someone needs to remind him his elo jump really was massive... on the order 800 elo in about a year. (from 1.6.1 to 1.0beta)
Parent - - By Prima (****) Date 2011-07-25 21:25
The below is quite funny...

>
> Vasik Rajlich:
> Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake: Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.
>


So according to him... elo jumps were "massive" :lol:

>
> But when it comes to him...
> Anyway, if I really had to give a number - my wild guess is that Rybka would be 20 rating points weaker had Fruit not appeared.
>


MASSIVE for "them"... just 20 elo for "me" :lol::lol::lol:

Someone needs to remind him his elo jump really was massive... on the order 800 elo in about a year. (from 1.6.1 to 1.0beta)

Good observation and summary.
Parent - - By Watchman (***) Date 2011-07-25 22:24
thanks i did have to laugh at that...

But truthfully... I must say I am sad in general... all the crap this has stirred up...

the bickering... the animosity that some have... the indecency on display.

Sad about people who have invested so much energy in their favorite author having to face what he did... (of course, some blow it off or act like they blow it off).

People were so proud of his consecutive victories at WCCC and other tourneys... now that is shook out like one shakes the dirt out of a rug.

Not what I call, "good times" :sad:
Parent - By Prima (****) Date 2011-07-25 23:46
For me, the sad part isn't the argument/quarrel about Rybka.

Though the lies, hypocrisy/double standards involved, and the 'need to be defined by and/or be identified with Rybka engine' (or to be 'Rybkafied', if you will) are glaringly apparent & amusing, the sad part is the author, whom they blindly defend with tooth and nails, hasn't supplied them facts to at least support their defense claims apropos Rybka.

Even more sad is the glaring evidence and the admittance of using "public domain codes", in conjunction to the already used GPL codes in R1-2.3.2a, in a commercial Rybka (in 3 & 4?), from the recent interview by Nelson Hernandez.

No one's against Vasik for using GPL or public domain codes in his engine. I know I'm not. Just acknowledge and honour the authors involved with respect to the GPL and public domain licenses. Another simple concept missed by majority supporting Vas.
Parent - - By bob (Gold) Date 2011-07-26 15:19
There is a _huge_ difference between saying "I took many ideas" and "copying actual code"...
Parent - - By SR (****) Date 2011-07-26 15:23
I agree, however please use the terminology I thought we agreed on (in the Fruit case) i.e.
"translating actual code" rather than "copying actual code"
Parent - - By bob (Gold) Date 2011-07-26 17:28
There are _both_.  Translation in the eval.  Copying in other places.  Both apply equally since both were done.
Parent - - By M ANSARI (*****) Date 2011-07-27 12:01
I disagree that translation in computer code is considered copying.  There is clearly no problem in code that is translated.  With regards to verbatim code copying, of course that is another matter.  Other than the UCI parser code (or non chess engine relevant code), is there any copying of Fruit code in Rybka?
Parent - By bob (Gold) Date 2011-07-27 16:28
Just read Zach's report.

If you disagree that translating is copying, you should be able to take robolito, and translate it to ADA, or FORTRAN, or PL/1, and enter it into a tournament as a new and original work, correct?  And while you are at it, you should be able to take some of Matt Reilly's books, like "Contest", "Area 7", "Ice Station", and translate those to French and sell those as new and original books, correct?
- - By RivertonKnight (*) Date 2011-07-26 02:07
Well, I think what Vas was saying is Rybka would have turned out 20 points weaker, if he hadn't used similiar search technique of Fruit 2.
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-07-26 06:43
He probably would have taken a lot longer to develop Rybka.
Parent - - By Razor (****) Date 2011-07-27 17:04
Perhaps never!  :smile:
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-07-27 20:07
The genius was there, the talent was there, Vas just was ahead of his time, in part because he started as Fruit. "Ahead of his time" also means that time could have "frozen" without his improvements, and engines may have remained stagnated for a while till Vas built an engine with his own ideas, giving the same results but shifted in time to a more future date (maybe Rybka 1.0 Beta at early 2007?)

Who knows if at that point another new engine would have already been there, though, one has to think that the huge improvement of Rybka overshadowed the improvements of other engines.
Parent - By Razor (****) Date 2011-07-27 20:41
Perhaps - we will never know will we.
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / IGCA investigation confirms that Vas spoke the truth

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill