Stats for SETI@home only

Message boards : Number crunching : Stats for SETI@home only
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile The Gas Giant
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Nov 01
Posts: 1904
Credit: 2,646,654
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 1019542 - Posted: 25 Jul 2010, 20:50:13 UTC
Last modified: 25 Jul 2010, 20:53:15 UTC

Weekly and monthly do it for me and maybe showing the info in a pie chart format may make it easier to understand the information being shown.
ID: 1019542 · Report as offensive
Josef W. Segur
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 30 Oct 99
Posts: 4504
Credit: 1,414,761
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1019561 - Posted: 25 Jul 2010, 22:28:20 UTC - in response to Message 1019542.  

Weekly and monthly do it for me and maybe showing the info in a pie chart format may make it easier to understand the information being shown.

Weekly makes a lot of sense with the current on/off cycle, either daily average or totals. For a longer term, I'd think seriously about defining active users as those which have credit within the longest deadline of ~64.5 days. That peak is very rare, but much of the work has deadlines over six weeks. For a host attached to many BOINC projects, it wouldn't be surprising for the work to end up being done just before deadline.

OTOH, what Scarecrow has already produced is fine with me. The tables allow easy consideration of longer terms, the graphics present the current situation quite well.
                                                                 Joe
ID: 1019561 · Report as offensive
Profile John Neale
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 00
Posts: 634
Credit: 7,246,513
RAC: 9
South Africa
Message 1019712 - Posted: 26 Jul 2010, 15:00:58 UTC

Again, I agree that weekly or even monthly averages will provide a "smoothed" picture, given the current volatility in daily data. Perhaps these can be integrated into or added to the current daily tables, with a pie chart to represent the most recent week's averages, as suggested by The Gas Giant.

It stands to reason that users with an RAC of less than 30 (and probably as high as 150) won't report every day. The main reason for this is that, with many workunits earning between 100 and 150 credits, slower machines will need more than a day to crunch a single unit (and AP workunits will take much longer, of course). A second scenario is when the user is attached to other projects, and BOINC is then likely to report closer to the deadline (Joe's earlier post refers). Thirdly, some users (with laptops and dial-up connections, for example) may not attach their computers to the Internet every day. I do concede that the second and third scenarios are likely to affect all RAC groups in roughly equal measure.

[off topic]@ The Gas Giant: it's good to see another process engineer in the forums. We need to stick together in this IT-savvy group!![/off topic]
ID: 1019712 · Report as offensive
Profile soft^spirit
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6497
Credit: 34,134,168
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1019722 - Posted: 26 Jul 2010, 15:31:53 UTC

I believe the entire idea is just to get an idea. It has helped give me a better understanding. Individuals will tend to average out.. so a snapshot
of a day should "on average" give us an average. Mileage always varies.

There is no perfect chart. There is no perfect statistic. But if you put a pattern together, you can see trends. And that is helpful in gaining understanding.


Janice
ID: 1019722 · Report as offensive
Profile Uli
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 00
Posts: 10923
Credit: 5,996,015
RAC: 1
Germany
Message 1019923 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 1:50:08 UTC
Last modified: 27 Jul 2010, 1:50:43 UTC

The staff should consider some cleanup, as anyone with a residual rac of say less 0.20 is no longer active. I don't know, why the values don't go down to 0.
Then Scarecrow could eliminate the inactive ones and give us a truer picture.
JMHO
Pluto will always be a planet to me.

Seti Ambassador
Not to late to order an Anni Shirt
ID: 1019923 · Report as offensive
Robert Ribbeck
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 7 Jun 02
Posts: 644
Credit: 5,283,174
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1019926 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 2:05:25 UTC - in response to Message 1019923.  

The staff should consider some cleanup, as anyone with a residual rac of say less 0.20 is no longer active. I don't know, why the values don't go down to 0.
Then Scarecrow could eliminate the inactive ones and give us a truer picture.
JMHO


My suggestion way back was ignore the less than 1
those numbers are so small they are not significant anyway

ID: 1019926 · Report as offensive
Profile hiamps
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 May 99
Posts: 4292
Credit: 72,971,319
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1019929 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 2:19:34 UTC - in response to Message 1019926.  

The staff should consider some cleanup, as anyone with a residual rac of say less 0.20 is no longer active. I don't know, why the values don't go down to 0.
Then Scarecrow could eliminate the inactive ones and give us a truer picture.
JMHO


My suggestion way back was ignore the less than 1
those numbers are so small they are not significant anyway

I tend to agree, I have some in my list and a couple on my team that haven't crunched in a long long time but still have an RAC.
Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!
ID: 1019929 · Report as offensive
Profile hiamps
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 May 99
Posts: 4292
Credit: 72,971,319
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020142 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 15:40:18 UTC

Just wondering, for you stat guys...Is there anyway to know what percentage of work is done by the top 500 hosts?
Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!
ID: 1020142 · Report as offensive
Profile soft^spirit
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6497
Credit: 34,134,168
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020152 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 16:00:02 UTC - in response to Message 1020142.  

oops.. "by host" question.. I think means brand new calculations..

But if it helps at all..

From the last chart I saw 13.11% of the total work was done by the top
162 users.


Janice
ID: 1020152 · Report as offensive
Profile John Neale
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 00
Posts: 634
Credit: 7,246,513
RAC: 9
South Africa
Message 1020156 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 16:02:17 UTC - in response to Message 1020142.  

Just wondering, for you stat guys...Is there anyway to know what percentage of work is done by the top 500 hosts?


A rough estimate: about 20% of the work is done by the top 500 users (not hosts).
ID: 1020156 · Report as offensive
Profile hiamps
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 May 99
Posts: 4292
Credit: 72,971,319
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020157 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 16:07:07 UTC - in response to Message 1020156.  

Just wondering, for you stat guys...Is there anyway to know what percentage of work is done by the top 500 hosts?


A rough estimate: about 20% of the work is done by the top 500 users (not hosts).

Thats funny, we do a huge percentage of the work yet are villainized by so many...
Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!
ID: 1020157 · Report as offensive
Profile soft^spirit
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6497
Credit: 34,134,168
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020158 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 16:08:39 UTC - in response to Message 1020157.  

Just wondering, for you stat guys...Is there anyway to know what percentage of work is done by the top 500 hosts?


A rough estimate: about 20% of the work is done by the top 500 users (not hosts).

Thats funny, we do a huge percentage of the work yet are villainized by so many...


Ahh yes the "I got mine so shut up" crowd. Weren't they called sociopaths
at one point?


Janice
ID: 1020158 · Report as offensive
Profile Bill Walker
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Sep 99
Posts: 3868
Credit: 2,697,267
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1020197 - Posted: 27 Jul 2010, 23:06:12 UTC - in response to Message 1020157.  

Just wondering, for you stat guys...Is there anyway to know what percentage of work is done by the top 500 hosts?


A rough estimate: about 20% of the work is done by the top 500 users (not hosts).

Thats funny, we do a huge percentage of the work yet are villainized by so many...


So the other users (who do 80 % of the work) should be 4 times as important as the big guys?

Just joking, sort of.

ID: 1020197 · Report as offensive
Scarecrow

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 00
Posts: 4520
Credit: 486,601
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020243 - Posted: 28 Jul 2010, 2:47:44 UTC

Looks like the RAC stats are a day or two behind....I was out of the shop the last couple days and it appears the DB server that handles the RAC stats is blowing snot bubbles. I shall get it a tissue.
ID: 1020243 · Report as offensive
Robert Ribbeck
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 7 Jun 02
Posts: 644
Credit: 5,283,174
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020369 - Posted: 28 Jul 2010, 13:49:46 UTC - in response to Message 1020197.  

Just wondering, for you stat guys...Is there anyway to know what percentage of work is done by the top 500 hosts?


A rough estimate: about 20% of the work is done by the top 500 users (not hosts).

Thats funny, we do a huge percentage of the work yet are villainized by so many...


So the other users (who do 80 % of the work) should be 4 times as important as the big guys?

Just joking, sort of.


Ya it makes sense that the 58.8% of the users only doing 3.3% of the wu
should be more important than the 2.43% of the users doing 47.55% of the wu

hah hah hah
ID: 1020369 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 1020482 - Posted: 29 Jul 2010, 0:09:52 UTC - in response to Message 1020369.  

Just wondering, for you stat guys...Is there anyway to know what percentage of work is done by the top 500 hosts?


A rough estimate: about 20% of the work is done by the top 500 users (not hosts).

Thats funny, we do a huge percentage of the work yet are villainized by so many...


So the other users (who do 80 % of the work) should be 4 times as important as the big guys?

Just joking, sort of.


Ya it makes sense that the 58.8% of the users only doing 3.3% of the wu
should be more important than the 2.43% of the users doing 47.55% of the wu

hah hah hah


Doesn't matter. Nobody should be more important than anyone else.
ID: 1020482 · Report as offensive
Robert Ribbeck
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 7 Jun 02
Posts: 644
Credit: 5,283,174
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020483 - Posted: 29 Jul 2010, 0:17:16 UTC - in response to Message 1020482.  



Doesn't matter. Nobody should be more important than anyone else.



or less
ID: 1020483 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 1020485 - Posted: 29 Jul 2010, 0:21:17 UTC - in response to Message 1020483.  

Doesn't matter. Nobody should be more important than anyone else.


or less


Last time I checked, no one has actually said the larger crunchers are worthless. But I have seen lots of larger crunchers threaten if they don't get their way with the project, they'll leave and that the project needs to keep them happy.
ID: 1020485 · Report as offensive
Scarecrow

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 00
Posts: 4520
Credit: 486,601
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020601 - Posted: 29 Jul 2010, 14:18:52 UTC - in response to Message 1019429.  


Now, I somehow would expect a more or less gaussian distribution. For some reason the 300-499 group is exceptionally small. There must be system based reason why less users fall into that category.

Or, it could have been a buglet in the code. Which has now been corrected so the 300-499 group should be accurate. Let this be a lesson, never code sober.
ID: 1020601 · Report as offensive
Robert Ribbeck
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 7 Jun 02
Posts: 644
Credit: 5,283,174
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1020673 - Posted: 29 Jul 2010, 20:06:44 UTC - in response to Message 1020601.  


Now, I somehow would expect a more or less gaussian distribution. For some reason the 300-499 group is exceptionally small. There must be system based reason why less users fall into that category.

Or, it could have been a buglet in the code. Which has now been corrected so the 300-499 group should be accurate. Let this be a lesson, never code sober.


May I question that correction
That jumps the total active users 9000 in one day
which is not consistent with the number of users thru the month
ID: 1020673 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Stats for SETI@home only


 
©2022 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.