The old SETI system told you just how many WUs you crunched. The new system scores the usability of crunched data.

I'd like to see users get two scores, one showing how many WUs have been crunched (combining the old Seti WUs and the new BOINC WUs), and the second total showing the credit granted, and I guess an arbitrary score added to that total from the old SETI WUs that were crunched (say 10 credits for each WU)

Folding at home operates a similar system and it gives a clearer picture of progress I think.

---

I personally would not wan.t to mix the old with the new system.
The credits are calulated differently and would obscure the new process
the old credits are listed on your personal page.

Just me I could be wrong,,,

---

> The old SETI system told you just how many WUs you crunched. The new system scores the usability of crunched data.


Yanno... it dosn't even take the usability of the unit. They are all useable, but the credit is calculated by 2 numbers. The time processed and the floating points or whatever... and its not even your score that is recorded, it could be someones else. I don't think this is too good at all, IMO

---

The workunit counter is useful only when all the workunit are of the same size, for now all the seti packets are of the same lenght, but in the future who knows? they can decide to give larger workunits to faster computers.

And with several projects, credits it's a good way to compare the work done in a no project specific manner.

---

<img src="http://www.boincstats.com/stats/banner.php?cpid=eb8430bdcd1ac999e6fdea2ba9da7454">

S@H is scheduling several different sized WUs. S@H from Aricebo, S@H from Parkes, AstroPulse from Aricebo, and AstroPulse from Parkes, re-observation data for all of these. There is probably a 5x variation over the minimum and maximum times for WUs that crunch all the way through. Also remember that noisy WUs take only a few minutes. Low and High angle WUs take different processing times. In short WU counting is no longer a viable way of granting credit.

---

BOINC WIKI

> I personally would not wan.t to mix the old with the new system.
> The credits are calulated differently and would obscure the new process
> the old credits are listed on your personal page.
>
> Just me I could be wrong,,,
>
I agree, I don't want the old mixed with the new either. In the old system it didn't matter if a computer was submitting good data or just junk. That is why some people were cheating. In BOINC only good data gets any credit. I just wish they could stop these people who are downloading hundreds of workunits and not doing any processing.

> I agree, I don't want the old mixed with the new either. In the old system it
> didn't matter if a computer was submitting good data or just junk. That is why
> some people were cheating. In BOINC only good data gets any credit. I just
> wish they could stop these people who are downloading hundreds of workunits
> and not doing any processing.
>

Me too. I'm still running SETI Classic at the same time because of the screensaver, which currently doesn't exist for SETI BOINC on a Mac.

I generally seem to have just two work units at a time on the Mac, one being worked on and one waiting. Each time a finished one is uploaded, I get sent a new one. Don't ask me how this works out as I've not specified any preferences for this.

---

> > I agree, I don't want the old mixed with the new either. In the old
> system it
> > didn't matter if a computer was submitting good data or just junk. That
> is why
> > some people were cheating. In BOINC only good data gets any credit. I
> just
> > wish they could stop these people who are downloading hundreds of
> workunits
> > and not doing any processing.
> >
>
> Me too. I'm still running SETI Classic at the same time because of the
> screensaver, which currently doesn't exist for SETI BOINC on a Mac.
>
> I generally seem to have just two work units at a time on the Mac, one being
> worked on and one waiting. Each time a finished one is uploaded, I get sent a
> new one. Don't ask me how this works out as I've not specified any preferences
> for this.
>
On the "your account" page on the web you can set the time between connections. This setting determines how many WUs of the various kinds you will get at once.

---

BOINC WIKI

> > I generally seem to have just two work units at a time on the Mac, one
> being
> > worked on and one waiting. Each time a finished one is uploaded, I get
> sent a
> > new one. Don't ask me how this works out as I've not specified any
> preferences
> > for this.
> >
> On the "your account" page on the web you can set the time between
> connections. This setting determines how many WUs of the various kinds you
> will get at once.
>

Yes, I looked at that and it's set at every 0.1 days, which is how it's always been. According to my log, the Mac just requests another WU when it is getting low on work.

---

> S@H is scheduling several different sized WUs. S@H from Aricebo, S@H from
> Parkes, AstroPulse from Aricebo, and AstroPulse from Parkes, re-observation
> data for all of these. There is probably a 5x variation over the minimum and
> maximum times for WUs that crunch all the way through. Also remember that
> noisy WUs take only a few minutes. Low and High angle WUs take different
> processing times. In short WU counting is no longer a viable way of granting
> credit.
>

Thanks John, I didn't realize there was going to be quite that big of a change.

---