Message boards :
Number crunching :
Astropulse Errors-Optimized version 5
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Blurf Send message Joined: 2 Sep 06 Posts: 8962 Credit: 12,678,685 RAC: 0 |
This thread is to post errors and address concerns regarding the new Optimised AP v5.00 Astropulse application. Please do not open new threads but post errors and commentary here. Please, upgrade your optimized AP version to ap_5.00r103! Thanks! |
Wild6-NJ Send message Joined: 4 Aug 99 Posts: 43 Credit: 100,336,791 RAC: 140 |
Greetings all- THIS result was declared invalid and received zero credit, but the other two results for the wu got credit. Except for one other ap wu (also zero but waiting for a third result), all my others have received proper credit or are pending. Is there any reason for this? (FYI: I may have upgraded to V5.00/4.37 while this wu was in process.) |
SlimDiesel Send message Joined: 2 Sep 99 Posts: 10 Credit: 15,496,641 RAC: 8 |
Similar situation here? Several machines report this, mine among them (obviously) and the only one who got credit was the guy who aborted it??? |
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
Greetings all- Looks like a half way through switchover. I'd suggest to forget about this one. "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. |
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
Similar situation here? Several machines report this, mine among them (obviously) and the only one who got credit was the guy who aborted it??? There is seemingly no optimised application represtented in any of the tasks here. Are you sure this relates to v5 Optimised "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. |
| ganja | Send message Joined: 9 Aug 08 Posts: 26 Credit: 2,463,915 RAC: 0 |
I am running the opti v5 for astropulse and I have had two out of five give me 0 credit has anyone else had this problem the rest give me around 757 or so. ganja |
Josef W. Segur Send message Joined: 30 Oct 99 Posts: 4504 Credit: 1,414,761 RAC: 0 |
I am running the opti v5 for astropulse and I have had two out of five give me 0 credit has anyone else had this problem the rest give me around 757 or so. The "Valid" indication is bogus, neither WU 373524588 nor WU 351720292 have been decided yet. Many users have seen the same, just look to see if a canonical result has been chosen to know if final judgement has been reached. WU 351720292 may be in danger of erroring out, so cross your fingers on that one. Joe |
Gustav_and_Padma Send message Joined: 26 Oct 03 Posts: 16 Credit: 315,654 RAC: 0 |
What happens when a successfully completed WU waits over a month for a wingman to validate? Included in our pending credit total, we had an AP WU of about 750 credits pending last night. But this morning they were dropped from our pending credit total and the result is no longer visible. Our total credit didn't increase accordingly. Was the work lost? This other one is a month old too, and we're wondering if results like these will eventually get considered, or if we are just wasting electricity. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=354147917 |
Leaps-from-Shadows Send message Joined: 11 Aug 08 Posts: 323 Credit: 259,220 RAC: 0 |
There is no time limit for Pending units. Work units will appear in Pending until they are validated, period. It doesn't matter whether they are Astropulse or Multibeam. I've had Pending work units for over nine weeks. If a work unit disappeared from your Pending, it was validated. You may not have gotten credit for it because of the recent transition. You are able to see the results for 24 hours after validation. Once those 24 hours are up, the visible info gets deleted. Cruiser Gateway GT5692 L-f-S Edition -Phenom X4 9650 CPU -4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM -500GB SATA HD -Vista x64 SP1 -BOINC 6.2.19 32-bit client -SSE3 optimized 32-bit apps |
Cosmic_Ocean Send message Joined: 23 Dec 00 Posts: 3027 Credit: 13,516,867 RAC: 13 |
What I have found with the AP units is if they go into the third-party verification state, the granted credit changes to zero until the third result comes in, and since some kind of credit was granted, it disappears from pending. I've got several APs that are like that. Linux laptop: record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up) |
Gustav_and_Padma Send message Joined: 26 Oct 03 Posts: 16 Credit: 315,654 RAC: 0 |
OK. thanx. Actually since the last time we checked, our total credit just jumped up to where we assumed it would go if granted crdit. So, even tho some umtold number of pending AP WU's are still ver 4,(not just ours but everyone elses) they are likely to validate too, it would seem. We could be wrong about this: What we are saying is that we don't think the credit was visible for 24 hours after it disappeared from pending status. And it seems like it took well over 12 hours before the credit was added to our total. We are just glad that the older version AP WU's are able to validate at all. Cheers! |
mmonroe Send message Joined: 22 Oct 06 Posts: 20 Credit: 5,132,754 RAC: 0 |
mmaybe this is another of these. I run 4.36; wingman runs 5.00 http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=360133998 |
Byron S Goodgame Send message Joined: 16 Jan 06 Posts: 1145 Credit: 3,936,993 RAC: 0 |
|
mmonroe Send message Joined: 22 Oct 06 Posts: 20 Credit: 5,132,754 RAC: 0 |
[quote]mmaybe this is another of these. I run 4.36; wingman runs 5.00 Yes it appears to be.[/quotegThanks what can I do about it, if anything? |
Byron S Goodgame Send message Joined: 16 Jan 06 Posts: 1145 Credit: 3,936,993 RAC: 0 |
mmaybe this is another of these. I run 4.36; wingman runs 5.00 Yes it appears to be. Not much you can do but wait for the wingman to complete the task so that the validity of the tasks and credit can be determined. |
mmonroe Send message Joined: 22 Oct 06 Posts: 20 Credit: 5,132,754 RAC: 0 |
mmaybe this is another of these. I run 4.36; wingman runs 5.00 Thanks. A quick question: I am using the app downloaded from SETI; I choose not to use the optimized app because I am concerned about the upkeep and my technical capability to install it correctly. I understand the main advantage of the app is that it runs ap faster.Given that, how is an app from outside the SETI group allowed to run and negate the results of the SETI app I run? It appears to me that whoever coded the optimized app failed to properly vet it against the stock app many of us use so that the results were similar and, more important accepatble to SETI. How can this happen? |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14653 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
Thanks. A quick question: Just running the stock app is fine - your contribution to SETI@Home is still welcomed and appreciated. Optimised apps are sometimes fiddly and time-consuming to manage: you've made an honest appraisal of the committment you're prepared to make, and come to an appropriate decision. With regard to the validation problem: the project in fact does officially support and endorse the use of optimised applications - the source code is made publicly available for volunteers to work on, and many improvements over the years have been initiated by volunteers but subsequently accepted back into the 'official' applications. The optimisation programmers go to great lengths, as a matter of pride, to ensure that their work is a least as good as, and sometimes better, than the Berkeley applications, and that the results validate as reliably as possible. In the case of your WU 1047643474, none of this applies: both you and your wingman used the stock app downloaded from SETI. Neither of you used an optimised application. The trouble is, the two of you calculated the results a month appart (somebody else neglected to return the task allocated to them), and in the meantime Berkeley updated their application - and the new version doesn't match the old one. Something went wrong with either the planning or the implementation of the transition: we don't know what, because neither of the programmers involved has posted on a public website since it happened. We can only speculate. |
Josef W. Segur Send message Joined: 30 Oct 99 Posts: 4504 Credit: 1,414,761 RAC: 0 |
mmaybe this is another of these. I run 4.36; wingman runs 5.00 The 5.00 optimized app being used by host 4009342 will probably do what it is designed to, and match the stock 5.00 result. If there's a problem with the optimized app it won't match and yet another host will be given the WU. There are still many possible outcomes, here are some: 1) The next result matches the 5.00 stock result, your result from 4.36 isn't close enough, but Eric's credit granting script runs and gives you credit because you crunched in good faith. 2) The next result matches the 5.00 stock result, your 4.36 result is weakly similar so the Validator grants credit. 3) The original wingman's host finishes the WU before the new host, the result is strongly similar to yours, and yours becomes the canonical result. 4) The WU gets to the maximum of 10 results without a match and nobody gets credit. 5) The project shuts down for lack of funds and nobody gets any credits. I consider 1) most likely, though there's certainly the possibility the script won't be run at the right time to help or it doesn't handle this specific situation. 2) is definitely possible though I can't judge how likely. 3), 4), and 5) are quite unlikely of course. Joe |
mmonroe Send message Joined: 22 Oct 06 Posts: 20 Credit: 5,132,754 RAC: 0 |
Thanks. A quick question: OK not to sound stupid but I am using the 6.2.19 app from SETI. How do I get the 5.00 app you refer to? |
dnolan Send message Joined: 30 Aug 01 Posts: 1228 Credit: 47,779,411 RAC: 32 |
6.2.19 is the version of Boinc, 5.00 is the version of the AP science app. If you are running stock with no app_info.xml file, you probably already have it, [edit] or will when you get new Astropulse work [/edit] otherwise you have to download the appropriate package. You can check here for a download link. -Dave |
©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.