Questions and Answers :
Windows :
very short run times
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
JakeTheDog Send message Joined: 3 Nov 13 Posts: 153 Credit: 2,585,912 RAC: 0 |
Hello, for the past couple weeks I have noticed that maybe 5% of my tasks are getting less than a minute of run time, maybe sometimes less than 10 seconds. I have never seen this in my results before, and they are being marked as valid. This seems kind of odd, and when I usually see these short run times as invalid in wingmen's. So I am wondering if some of these work units are corrupted in some way and need to be rerun. Or perhaps both the wingman and I have incorrect but identical results. Or perhaps it is normal for some of these work units to only require 3 seconds of run time. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
The length of time a task is processed greatly depends on the Angle Range in which it was recorded by the receiver. Tasks that are recorded on a Very High Angle Range (VHAR) typically process in a matter of seconds. Tasks recorded on a Very Low Angle Range (VLAR) typically take longer to process. This is perfectly normal behavior. |
JakeTheDog Send message Joined: 3 Nov 13 Posts: 153 Credit: 2,585,912 RAC: 0 |
Well OK then. It just seemed odd since I've never seen any of my results use so little time until now. |
Fred E. Send message Joined: 22 Jul 99 Posts: 768 Credit: 24,140,697 RAC: 0 |
I looked at 3 result files in your validated list that ran for 75 seconds or less. All 3 were -9 result overflow tasks. The application stops when it finds 30 signals in a single file. Sometimes it's a problem with your gpu (high temperatures, etc.). But in these cases, the wingman computer(s) found the same thing, so no need to worry now. One example (task 33`19678742) ... Preemptively acknowledging a safe Exit. -> SETI@Home Informational message -9 result_overflow NOTE: The number of results detected equals the storage space allocated. Flopcounter: 2336471688390.454600 Spike count: 30 Autocorr count: 0 Pulse count: 0 Triplet count: 0 Gaussian count: 0 Worker preemptively acknowledging an overflow exit.-> called boinc_finish ... Another Fred Support SETI@home when you search the Web with GoodSearch or shop online with GoodShop. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
All 3 were -9 result overflow tasks. The application stops when it finds 30 signals in a single file. Yes, a very common trait of VHAR type tasks, which is why they crunch so quickly. |
John Chrzastek Send message Joined: 28 May 12 Posts: 45 Credit: 29,723,112 RAC: 0 |
I assume that VLAR antenna positions receive more signals because the lower angles pick up more terrestrial signals. The antenna does not have a perfect laser like beam to it - it's beam is wider therefore terrestrial signals 'leak' into the receiver. Am I correct in my reasoning? |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Actually, it is my understanding that it is the opposite. VHAR angles pick up more terrestrial signals that need to be removed from the workunit (or "task"), and because of the amount of blanking, they process very quickly. VLARs have less terrestrial noise and thus more time is spent on processing the entire workunit, non-blanked. It was fellow forum poster Ageless that pointed out to me an easy way to remember the difference in the types of workunits: Very (s)Low Angle Range (VLAR, are slower to process), which by inverse means that VHARs processes very quickly. |
John Chrzastek Send message Joined: 28 May 12 Posts: 45 Credit: 29,723,112 RAC: 0 |
OK, got it and thank you. Do you know if the file formats are explained anywhere? I don't seem to be able to find them. What I', wondering about now is ... for example ... ' 21oc13ad.23072.3339.438086664202.12.148_0. The ' 21oc13 ' obviously means October 21, 2013 ... I'm curious about the " ad " part. And the last portion ... " .148_0 " I think I read someplace where the " _0 " means I am the virst one to get it and if it were " .148_1 " it meant that I was the second one to process it. This is all very fascinating. Thanks for your patience -John |
rob smith Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 22188 Credit: 416,307,556 RAC: 380 |
Filling in a couple of the blanks: "ad" indicates which receiver channel was used to collect the data. (148)_0 and _1 are the first pair of tasks to be distributed for this work unit If either you, or your wingman, has a problem, or you don't agree on the result then a task "_2" will be sent out to someone else (up to the maximum total tasks which is defined in the WU itself, normally 10 total I think) The big long number describes the location in the sky etc. (and I always get which bit is which wrong...) Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe? |
John Chrzastek Send message Joined: 28 May 12 Posts: 45 Credit: 29,723,112 RAC: 0 |
OK, thank you. I would love to know more about the receiver too but all things in good time. If _0 and _1 are each ether's wing men, is _2 the vertical stabilizer? Sorry. -John |
John McLeod VII Send message Joined: 15 Jul 99 Posts: 24806 Credit: 790,712 RAC: 0 |
Filling in a couple of the blanks: I was under the impression that ad was the 4th "tape" of the night. BOINC WIKI |
JakeTheDog Send message Joined: 3 Nov 13 Posts: 153 Credit: 2,585,912 RAC: 0 |
Well, I am curious about another thing, kind of related to short run times. I've been running SETI most days for the past 3 months now. I've never had an "invalid" result but maybe 2% show up as "inconclusive" and then will later show as "valid." The "inconclusives" almost always show up as pairs or triplets, and are always from the same wingman at that download request. When I look up the wingman, they have hundreds and hundreds of "invalid" tasks. So the thing I'm wondering about is, most results have single digit outcomes for the list of signals. If we have many SETI members with unstable computers giving hundreds of invalid results per month or even per week, wouldn't it be possible for 2 computers to have identical invalid results and for this these results to be marked as valid? |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
If we have many SETI members with unstable computers giving hundreds of invalid results per month or even per week, wouldn't it be possible for 2 computers to have identical invalid results and for this these results to be marked as valid? Yes, it is. For one such scenario, see thread Two wrongs make a right in the Number Crunching forum. |
John McLeod VII Send message Joined: 15 Jul 99 Posts: 24806 Credit: 790,712 RAC: 0 |
But it is unlikely. It is not the count that matters as much as the placement and magnitude of each event. BOINC WIKI |
©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.