I think mine is good but the two that validated are wrong. Ongoing problem.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=1802396926

---

SETI@home classic workunits 4,019
SETI@home classic CPU time 34,348 hours

Have a look there ...

Message boards : Number crunching : Major problem with a user

---

I just produced a few -9 results.
I just changed the number of tasks per GPU from 2 to 1, and in no time flat,produced about 40 faulty results.
The problem is, that it goes very fast and instead of being marked as "invalid", they become "validation inconclusive" and causing more trouble.

I was using cuda32 from lunatics(ver0.41). No change to driver.

(i think, the -9 results should be marked "INVALID", straight away! and, as these are computed very quickly, the loss of computing time is minimal)

Rasputin42 look at the other thread http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=77395#1686856

wow that must have been very slow you only have 512k ram on that card mate i would never try and run 2 units on a card like that take to long my 9400 gt had 1 gig of ram and was able to do 2 but very slow .She must be a old Lappy your using there .

---

I just produced a few -9 results.
I just changed the number of tasks per GPU from 2 to 1, and in no time flat,produced about 40 faulty results.
The problem is, that it goes very fast and instead of being marked as "invalid", they become "validation inconclusive" and causing more trouble.

I was using cuda32 from lunatics(ver0.41). No change to driver.

(i think, the -9 results should be marked "INVALID", straight away! and, as these are computed very quickly, the loss of computing time is minimal)

There is nothing inherently invalid about an overflow result.

SETI@Home Informational message -9 result_overflow
NOTE: The number of results detected equals the storage space allocated.

This can happen if a satellite happen to cross over the path of the reviver or something similar occurred.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

But there must be a way to identify these tasks.
This all seems to be a fairly recent phenomenon, so what changed and when?

Yes, she is an old lappi, but still going with no cd drive and no keyboard.

I know about the other thread, thanks.

Yes, she is an old lappi, but still going with no cd drive and no keyboard.

wow no keyboard or cd rom . I thought i've used some crappy setups but good on you for getting it to work and still crunching

---

But there must be a way to identify these tasks.
This all seems to be a fairly recent phenomenon, so what changed and when?

Yes, she is an old lappi, but still going with no cd drive and no keyboard.

I know about the other thread, thanks.

It isn't recent & has been ongoing for MANY years.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

I'd guess there's a lot of info hiding in the numbers, with 'Genuine' overflows meant to account for about 5% of multibeam results. Without having been present for such decisions, I believe the signal thresholds are set to yield around that, so that statistically 95% of the runs poke above the system noise floor, that noise floor including all the messy radar noise, Zombie or broken crunchers, cranky immature GPU applications and all manner of legitimate noise.

Reflecting that, I seem to see about a 1-2% inconclusive/pending ratio on a healthy system, with no invalids, no errors other than the occasional ghost task marked as abandoned since resend lost tasks has been off.

I think that rate of inconclusive is about 5 x better (used to be around 10% for v6 multibeam, less mature applications involved) than it used to be on a task by task basis... But then the GPU is definitely greater than 5x the throughput of my old 9600GSO, so probably the volume of inconclusives is greater. Multiplied across all users that could easily look like an expanding problem, rather than simple growth. I'm guessing the lines are a bit blurrier than that of course.

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

That is even worse, that nobody has found a fix in years.

If there is so much interference to cause a -9 overflow, the result is useless anyway, so why not discard it?
I very much doubt, that these are analyzed further, when there are thousands more promising signals to deal with.

The trouble is interference comes in various forms, sometimes it is a very narrow range that only affects a few work units in a "tape", this sort is hard to detect until we are doing our filtering, others can affect a whole "tape", and that is much more obvious at the outset.
Actually interference affects only a small fraction of the number of work units being processed, if my crunchers are anything to go with it is well below 1%

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

That is even worse, that nobody has found a fix in years.

If there is so much interference to cause a -9 overflow, the result is useless anyway, so why not discard it?
I very much doubt, that these are analyzed further, when there are thousands more promising signals to deal with.

Well it isn't known until the data is analyzed if it is just basically noise. That is out task to preform. They set a threshold probably for several reasons. I would guess. To keep the returned results from becoming to large. Also anything over that threshold is likely not going to be the kind of signal they are looking to find. Larger results may also take longer to run in the validator.

Any solution to "fix" the problem of run away GPUs & CPUs causing false overflows. By adding more checks on the server side would cause more complexity to an already complex system & take time by the project admins. Time is always in short supply for them.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

But there must be a way to identify these tasks.
This all seems to be a fairly recent phenomenon, so what changed and when? (...)

There is a way to do it:
If a *single* result seems to have run through without -9 overflow, than every *other* result showing -9 overflow is invalid! Simple as that.
This way false positive -9 overflows can only slip through, if they both are the first responses.

---

Aloha, Uli