Message boards :
Number crunching :
Validation inconclusive?
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Kibble (KB7TIB) Send message Joined: 6 Dec 99 Posts: 27 Credit: 10,121,469 RAC: 2 |
I'm not sure what the result of a pending WU means when two results are returned, from separate sources, of course. Does this mean, perhaps, that there is something wrong with the validation process. This is the first time I've ever seen this notation. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=492785162 |
[B^S] madmac Send message Joined: 9 Feb 04 Posts: 1175 Credit: 4,754,897 RAC: 0 |
No it does not mean that there is something wrong with validation process, the results that you and your wingman has done or not the same. I know because I am waiting for one, the results are close but not exactly the same. The WU is then posted to a third and when that comes back you will get the credit so I am afraid that it could be another month before you get credit or be unlucky and wait longer. |
dnolan Send message Joined: 30 Aug 01 Posts: 1228 Credit: 47,779,411 RAC: 32 |
I'm not sure what the result of a pending WU means when two results are returned, from separate sources, of course. Does this mean, perhaps, that there is something wrong with the validation process. This is the first time I've ever seen this notation. Link to WU (made link active) To have a pending result with 2 or more results returned is not that unusual. The situation can mean one of several things: - You had an error in your calculation, you won't get credit. - The other person had an error, that person won't get credit. - Both of you had errors, neither one of you will get credit. - Neither one of you made a mistake, but the results aren't strongly similar, either or both will eventually get credit, depending on if the two results already in are weakly similar or not. The amount of time you have to wait to find out depends on how long it takes to get 2 results returned that are strongly similar, once that happens, you'll find out which of the above cases are true. -Dave |
Ianab Send message Joined: 11 Jun 08 Posts: 732 Credit: 20,635,586 RAC: 5 |
When you look at the actual results returned you see. Your machine: Spike count: 15 Pulse count: 6 Triplet count: 8 Gaussian count: 0 Wingman Spike count: 0 Pulse count: 0 Triplet count: 0 Gaussian count: 0 Very different results, so the validation IS working as the results didn't match. I would suspect yours is correct and the wingman had an error. Another machine has errored out, and it's now been sent to a 4th machine. If that result agress with yours, then you get the credits. Ian |
Kibble (KB7TIB) Send message Joined: 6 Dec 99 Posts: 27 Credit: 10,121,469 RAC: 2 |
Thank you all; I understand the problem now. I was only surprised since this was the first time I've ever seen that particular result. Hopefully the next result will clear quickly for SETI@home's sake. |
Josef W. Segur Send message Joined: 30 Oct 99 Posts: 4504 Credit: 1,414,761 RAC: 0 |
When you look at the actual results returned you see. No, the wingman is using optimized "SSE3 Win32 Build 41", and like all AK_v8 builds before rev. 52 it doesn't preserve individual signal counts in the checkpoint file. Thus the counts are only those after its "Restarted at 70.57 percent". It's result file may well have 29 signals too, with one just enough different that a "strongly similar" comparison wasn't achieved. Another machine has errored out, and it's now been sent to a 4th machine. If that result agress with yours, then you get the credits. There's no way yet to judge how it'll turn out. I think most of these cases end up with 3 hosts getting credit, but don't have enough data to even guess at the statistical probabilities. Joe |
Ianab Send message Joined: 11 Jun 08 Posts: 732 Credit: 20,635,586 RAC: 5 |
Thanks for clearing that up Joe. Hopefully it's just a slightly different result from the different versions... Ian |
LiliKrist Send message Joined: 12 Aug 09 Posts: 333 Credit: 143,167 RAC: 0 |
I have the same matter. Here my task result : Task ID : 1337788497 WU ID : 493423957 Sent : 18 Aug 2009 13:25:05 UTC Time Reporded : 19 Aug 2009 14:53:40 UTC Status : Completed, validation inconclusive Run Times : 38,374.75 Claimed Credit : 85.93 Granted Credit : pending |
burnz Send message Joined: 14 Apr 04 Posts: 26 Credit: 178,564 RAC: 0 |
three inconclusive's i have not crunched it yet. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=494998204 so they are waiting on me. |
1mp0£173 Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 8423 Credit: 356,897 RAC: 0 |
Thanks for clearing that up Joe. It is far more likely that it is different results from slightly different processors. Most of the floating point math done by modern CPUs (FPUs) are estimated. The estimates are very, very good, but they're estimates. If one FPU (even from the same vendor, but different processor versions) consistently estimates just a tiny bit high, and the other estimates just a tiny bit too low, those errors can accumulate just enough to "fail" validation. Give the validators another result (or two) and they'll all center up around some actual value and eventually validate (probably). If it happens alot, it could be a problem with your CPU, but one robin does not make it spring. |
©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.