Re: Plagiary, CGF view

[cesczx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Chen Zhixing)]

Hello,

P. Shotwell wrote:
>
>If Hamlet and Silver Igo were 'copies' or 'partial copies' of Handtalk, how did
>they beat Handtalk?

   Winning or losing one game does not reflect the relative strength.  My
program participating 4th FOST Cup is Goemate, not Handtalk.  Goemate
contains many bugs at that time.  Its winning percentage vs. Handtalk was
only 1/3.  On 4th FOST Cup it lost to SilverIgo mainly due to its bug, while
it beated Hamlet. There is a tie between Goemate and Hamlet (they have the
same main score with 2 loss).  As Hamlet beated the Champion SilverIgo,
Hamlet has more score of beated opponents, so it ranks before Goemate.

> They must have improved on Handtalk or else they were
>specifically programmed to beat Handtalk. 

    Indeed, I have found that they contain some modifications.  But I don't
think those modifications lead to much improvements.

>From what I know, in the early years
>computer go programs were specifically designed to exploit weaknesses in Bruce
>Wilcox's Nemisis program.

    I would like to tell you a similar thing.  In 1998 National Computer Go
Tournament of China, there is a program focused on the weaknesses of
Handtalk. Its programmer told me that his program can lead over Handtalk by
tens of points in earlier stage of a game, but always lose after midgame.

> Had they, in effect, 'copied' Nemesis? They lacked
>strength in other ways and thus looked better than they actually were.

    I accused Silver Igo and Hamlet according to evidences of copying or
translation of the engine of my Handtalk and incorporating in them, not
according to the results of tournament.  I will show the evidences soon.

Chen Zhixing