Chess2u
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Chess2uLog in

descriptionGull 2.1 EmptyGull 2.1

more_horiz
Hi,
I have noticed that the latest Gull 2.1 is very strong when i run my engine tournaments. What's the origin of Gull anyway? Is it an original development or some kind of derivate?

Kandolo

descriptionGull 2.1 EmptyRe: Gull 2.1

more_horiz
@Kandolo wrote:
Hi,
I have noticed that the latest Gull 2.1 is very strong when i run my engine tournaments. What's the origin of Gull anyway? Is it an original development or some kind of derivate?

Kandolo


http://computer-chess.org/forum/index.php?mode=thread&id=2468

This is what Vadim had to say about Gull 2.1

Evaluation weights are optimized with the use of automated tuning (source code included).
Gull's evaluation is no longer almost identical to that of Ivanhoe.
Minor search & time management & SMP efficiency enhancements.

descriptionGull 2.1 EmptyGull 2.1

more_horiz
Thank you Graham,

So Gull 2.1 is basically some version of Ivanhoe with minor changes. I must say it takes some of the fun out of engine tournaments when it turns out that the engines are more or less playing against themselves. Do you btw know if there is a list of presumably original engines somewhere?

Kandolo

descriptionGull 2.1 EmptyRe: Gull 2.1

more_horiz
@Kandolo wrote:
Thank you Graham,

So Gull 2.1 is basically some version of Ivanhoe with minor changes. I must say it takes some of the fun out of engine tournaments when it turns out that the engines are more or less playing against themselves. Do you btw know if there is a list of presumably original engines somewhere?

Kandolo


I can't really comment on Gull, but thought I'd post those two pieces of information for you.
It's difficult to measure originality these days.
Strong open source code has changed the playing field.

Graham.

descriptionGull 2.1 EmptyRe: Gull 2.1

more_horiz
@Graham Banks wrote:
@Kandolo wrote:
Thank you Graham,

So Gull 2.1 is basically some version of Ivanhoe with minor changes. I must say it takes some of the fun out of engine tournaments when it turns out that the engines are more or less playing against themselves. Do you btw know if there is a list of presumably original engines somewhere?

Kandolo


I can't really comment on Gull, but thought I'd post those two pieces of information for you.
It's difficult to measure originality these days.
Strong open source code has changed the playing field.

Graham.


It seems to me that Gull has many changes in their skeleton.
SMP different, many different ideas of Ivanhoe.
Gull and its author are geniuses
It also has many similarities, yes, agree. But there are many programs that have copied  of proyect Ippolit (I mean not only the family), ect, ect.
The same there are lots of similar programs to Stockfish, ect.

I like how fans see the codes of all that is published. I think I know almost everyone, at a glance.
There is much copied, or small changes.


We need to open our minds, the end is 64 squares and 32 pieces, it is very difficult to do something different.


We must open our hands and get away from the Puritan discourse.
Rate projects for effort
and continuiodad.


Kandolo:
The authors do not usually criticize the testers.
Greetings.

descriptionGull 2.1 EmptyRe: Gull 2.1

more_horiz
Thank you again,

You comments made things a bit clearer to me. I guess my thinking initially was too simplistic. After all, to make an engine significantly stronger is an achievement in itself, no matter how small changes in the code. In addition to ELO as the criteria for assessment, development of different playing styles is another way to add value. I think I will continue to enjoy my engine tournaments after your elaboration on the matter.

Kandolo

descriptionGull 2.1 EmptyRe: Gull 2.1

more_horiz
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum