Is this guy cheating somehow?

Author	Message
Don Erway Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 305 Credit: 471,946 RAC: 0	Message 138526 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:14:27 UTC http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1094597 This shows that his WUs ALL take only a tiny CPU, yet he is contributing these bogus results, along with enough folks that put in real results, that he is getting full credit, with out doing the work..?? ID: 138526 ·

Harry.nl Send message Joined: 21 Apr 03 Posts: 53 Credit: 67,821 RAC: 0	Message 138528 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:22:04 UTC Looks like a bad benchmark? Or a verrrrry fast cpu...... ID: 138528 ·

Bill Barto Send message Joined: 28 Jun 99 Posts: 864 Credit: 58,712,313 RAC: 91	Message 138529 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:23:04 UTC - in response to Message 138526. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1094597 This shows that his WUs ALL take only a tiny CPU, yet he is contributing these bogus results, along with enough folks that put in real results, that he is getting full credit, with out doing the work..?? It might just be a problem with his host reporting the correct CPU time and claiming enough credits. His daily output does not seem to indicate that he is cheating unless his computer is off most of the time. ID: 138529 ·

Fuzzy Hollynoodles Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 9659 Credit: 251,998 RAC: 0	Message 138531 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:25:25 UTC - in response to Message 138526. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1094597 This shows that his WUs ALL take only a tiny CPU, yet he is contributing these bogus results, along with enough folks that put in real results, that he is getting full credit, with out doing the work..?? I can't say, but I took a loot on some of his results and they are all valid! So they must be OK, even he claim very little credit for them! "I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me ID: 138531 ·

[B^S] Paul@home Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 20 Dec 99 Posts: 121 Credit: 1,885,420 RAC: 0	Message 138533 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:27:26 UTC That's an odd one alright... The results are valid though so he's not cheating in a traditional sense.... The XML may have been edited to report incorrect benchmarks... but why you would do that i don't know.. unless you were to inrease the number to pushup your claimed credit. CAn the Wu reports also be edited to report incorrect CPU time etc? odd... Wanna visit BOINC Synergy? Click my stats! Join BOINC Synergy Team ID: 138533 ·

Dan Wulff Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Mar 00 Posts: 178 Credit: 5,039,952 RAC: 0	Message 138541 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:42:16 UTC I note that he's using CC 4.43 amd application version 4.02!! Plus 5,026 SETI Classic Units ID: 138541 ·

[B^S] Paul@home Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 20 Dec 99 Posts: 121 Credit: 1,885,420 RAC: 0	Message 138543 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:44:46 UTC Last modified: 18 Jul 2005, 21:46:45 UTC Good spot! 4.02 suggests SETI Beta application... but can it be that? how could that return valid results.... for the current live project... unless he has an optimised client which he has named 4.02 Wanna visit BOINC Synergy? Click my stats! Join BOINC Synergy Team ID: 138543 ·

Astro Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 Apr 02 Posts: 8026 Credit: 600,015 RAC: 0	Message 138548 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:48:55 UTC 4.02 is an Optimized Application used by US Seti Beta testers. I be he put it in the wrong folder. (I.E setiathome, instead of SetiathomeBeta.) the 4.02 application doubles the search sensitivity of the data. ID: 138548 ·

[B^S] Paul@home Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 20 Dec 99 Posts: 121 Credit: 1,885,420 RAC: 0	Message 138549 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:50:49 UTC yeah sounds about right, but how could that return valid results for the live (non beta) project? Wanna visit BOINC Synergy? Click my stats! Join BOINC Synergy Team ID: 138549 ·

Astro Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 Apr 02 Posts: 8026 Credit: 600,015 RAC: 0	Message 138550 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:52:24 UTC I'm off to find out if "Sandrews" is a Beta tester or not. I'll create thread in the appropriate location to try to get his attention. BRB ID: 138550 ·

Astro Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 Apr 02 Posts: 8026 Credit: 600,015 RAC: 0	Message 138554 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 21:59:29 UTC I didn't find that name out of the 194 Beta testers so I started a thread in NC so hopefully he'll see it. Good catch Don Erway ID: 138554 ·

[B^S] Paul@home Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 20 Dec 99 Posts: 121 Credit: 1,885,420 RAC: 0	Message 138556 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:00:32 UTC Last modified: 18 Jul 2005, 22:04:28 UTC Perhaps put the same thread in the BETA project site? he's on BOINC@AUSTRALIA team... but their forums dont seem to work! Wanna visit BOINC Synergy? Click my stats! Join BOINC Synergy Team ID: 138556 ·

Don Erway Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 305 Credit: 471,946 RAC: 0	Message 138562 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:03:45 UTC - in response to Message 138554. I didn't find that name out of the 194 Beta testers so I started a thread in NC so hopefully he'll see it. Good catch Don Erway So, if he is not on the beta tester list, how can he do it? Is it not a seperate account? I wonder if he found a way to hack the source and return a result that fools the validator, without doing the work. ID: 138562 ·

Astro Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 Apr 02 Posts: 8026 Credit: 600,015 RAC: 0	Message 138564 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:05:27 UTC I suspect he went to the Marisan website and just picked the wrong one. Unless he's getting his 500 claimed credit he's really wasting time for no extra credit. the 4.02 WUs take more than 5 hours on my AMD 64 Athlon 3700+ with the optimized client, I've heard of them taking 29 hours for other participants. that's gotta hurt. I don't think he's a beta tester but will post there also. The best solution would be for Berkeley to Email him. tony ID: 138564 ·

[B^S] Paul@home Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 20 Dec 99 Posts: 121 Credit: 1,885,420 RAC: 0	Message 138568 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:10:34 UTC Last modified: 18 Jul 2005, 22:12:28 UTC So, if he is not on the beta tester list, how can he do it? Is it not a seperate account? I wonder if he found a way to hack the source and return a result that fools the validator, without doing the work. SETI Beta is a separate BOINC project so the applications etc should be kept apart. What Mmciasto is suggesting is that perhaps he installed the BETA optimised client rather than live project optimised client. If that is the case then it is a fair enough mistake to make, however there is still a question as to how the validator could validate that results against the normal SETI app. The science is very different in the 2 (AFAIK) so it should not get through... I suppose though that there is no point speculating until we know exactly what is going on... he could be cheating also but only claiming less than 0.1 credit? what would be the point?!! Wanna visit BOINC Synergy? Click my stats! Join BOINC Synergy Team ID: 138568 ·

bguder Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3 Credit: 271,489 RAC: 0	Message 138573 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:20:18 UTC Version 4.02 is the current application version for SETI on linux machines. So I doubt anything is wrong with that. It is more likely a problem with the time-keeping in his Boinc CC and/or the SETI application. Unless you know a machine fast enough to crunch normal results in less than 10 min. ID: 138573 ·

Astro Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 Apr 02 Posts: 8026 Credit: 600,015 RAC: 0	Message 138574 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:20:25 UTC What I'm suggesting is that he acquired the wrong optimized APPLICATION file and installed it in the setiathome directory. He may have acquired it from marisan.nl, but that's unimportant. I don't know enough to know if the results would be compatible. I believe the WU are the same for both projects, but Beta is doubling the sensitivity of the search and possibly later on be crunching the new "Astropulse" WUs. ID: 138574 ·

Jim Baize Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 6 May 00 Posts: 758 Credit: 149,536 RAC: 0	Message 138581 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:24:37 UTC - in response to Message 138574. I do notice that all of his times are a fraction of what the other valid results are. His computer is listed as a Pentium Pro (very old). It will be interesting to find out what is really happening here. Jim What I'm suggesting is that he acquired the wrong optimized APPLICATION file and installed it in the setiathome directory. He may have acquired it from marisan.nl, but that's unimportant. I don't know enough to know if the results would be compatible. I believe the WU are the same for both projects, but Beta is doubling the sensitivity of the search and possibly later on be crunching the new "Astropulse" WUs. ID: 138581 ·

karthwyne Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 24 May 99 Posts: 218 Credit: 5,750,702 RAC: 0	Message 138582 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:25:05 UTC it is the time reporting that is wrong. you notice that it takes about a day to crunch each wu. the app should be fine since he is running linux. since the PC is listed as GenuineIntel Pentium Pro, the benchmarks appear in the correct ballpark for a non crippled 200MHz cpu. i have a celeron 500 that benches a little lower in win98 S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club ID: 138582 ·

Astro Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 Apr 02 Posts: 8026 Credit: 600,015 RAC: 0	Message 138587 - Posted: 18 Jul 2005, 22:34:19 UTC Seems I'm the dumb A**, I'll remove the other threads. sorry, it appears it is a linux 4.02 version with a 4.43 client. Don't know why he's only taking 527 seconds to complete the WUs unless it's an internal clock problem or maybe just clock time since last checkpoint. Sorry tony ID: 138587 ·

©2024 University of California

SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.