Message boards :
Number crunching :
Linux CUDA 'Special' App finally available, featuring Low CPU use
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 37 · 38 · 39 · 40 · 41 · 42 · 43 . . . 83 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
TBar Send message Joined: 22 May 99 Posts: 5204 Credit: 840,779,836 RAC: 2,768 |
And the results are...I decided to see if I could get my new Windows install working with the Benchmark. I haven't run it in some time...ever since WinNSA came out. I didn't have any trouble running the Benchmark after chasing down all the files, and installing all those updates. I ran the same task above on the machine with two 1050s; MBbench210.cmd ====================================== 1 testWU(s) found (04oc08ab.8413.17250.11.45.59.wu) 1 science app(s) found (MB8_win_x86_SSE3_OpenCL_NV_SoG_r3584.exe -sbs 256 -spike_fft_thresh 2048 -oclfft_tune_gr 256 -oclfft_tune_wg 256 -period_iterations_num 10) Gaussian: peak=2.961486, mean=0.5020315, ChiSq=1.415564, time=17.62, d_freq=1420573507.32, score=0.3144556, null_hyp=2.268668, chirp=-98.677, fft_len=16k Best gaussian: peak=2.961486, mean=0.5020315, ChiSq=1.415564, time=17.62, d_freq=1420573507.32, score=0.3144556, null_hyp=2.268668, chirp=-98.677, fft_len=16k I also ran 09no16aa.18442.2116.6.33.31.wu; Gaussian: peak=5.736884, mean=0.6174232, ChiSq=1.393288, time=69.63, d_freq=1420305107.67, score=0.6122654, null_hyp=2.236684, chirp=-62.462, fft_len=16k Gaussian: peak=5.793325, mean=0.5903414, ChiSq=1.403672, time=36.07, d_freq=1420298442.12, score=1.986567, null_hyp=2.315829, chirp=-71.95, fft_len=16k Gaussian: peak=5.745589, mean=0.583622, ChiSq=1.414207, time=59.56, d_freq=1420299457.13, score=2.05784, null_hyp=2.326043, chirp=90.136, fft_len=16k Best gaussian: peak=5.745589, mean=0.583622, ChiSq=1.414207, time=59.56, d_freq=1420299457.13, score=2.05784, null_hyp=2.326043, chirp=90.136, fft_len=16k It definitely uses a reported signal as Best. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
I also ran 09no16aa.18442.2116.6.33.31.wu;And I ran that one overnight last night, as well. setiathome_8.00_windows_intelx86.exe -verb -nog / 09no16aa.18442.2116.6.33.31.wu: The 3 reported gaussians were: <peak_power>5.7368845939636</peak_power> <peak_power>5.7933268547058</peak_power> <peak_power>5.7455887794495</peak_power> ... whereas the Best Gaussian was: <peak_power>6.3855581283569</peak_power> How there can be a "best" signal that isn't worth reporting (when there are apparently 3 inferior signals that are) is beyond me, but that's apparently the standard. :^) |
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
How there can be a "best" signal that isn't worth reporting (when there are apparently 3 inferior signals that are) is beyond me, but that's apparently the standard. :^) For best there is a check, added ~2011, of the CHiSq fit ('i.e. 'Gaussian-ness') , in addition to the score used for reporting. My cursory reading suggests the Best may be reportable, maybe not, though yet to do a full line by line analysis. The suspected variation is in the multiple different implementations in that logic in the different branches, though that doesn't rule out other bugs or cumulative error "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. |
TBar Send message Joined: 22 May 99 Posts: 5204 Credit: 840,779,836 RAC: 2,768 |
Previous tests indicate only the Apps compiled using the SoG path have this *feature* of using reported as Best. All the other Apps that don't use the SoG compile path, that I've seen, give the correct Best Gaussian. That can be seen in the Results I posted at Crunchers Anonymous, the previous posts in this thread, and the recent test against the ATI Apps here, http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=2586601005 In that test My CPU agreed with zi3v, SETI@home v8 v8.22 (opencl_ati5_SoG_cat132) windows_intelx86 Failed, while SETI@home v8 v8.22 (opencl_ati_nocal) windows_intelx86 must have agreed with zi3v as zi3v was give the *canonical result - 5833121549*. At least that time zi3v wasn't robbed of canonical, I suspect My Inconclusives would be Lower if the SoGs were reporting the Correct Best Gaussian. Fortunately, there are Non-SoG builds readily available for Most Apps, https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/apps.php except maybe Windows nVidia...the most used. There is a Mac Non-SoG ATI App at Beta that's been there as long as the 8.20 SoG build. The Mac nVidia SoG App never existed as I couldn't get it to work correctly using the SoG path. A New Windows CPU App? Windows/x86 running on an AMD x86_64 or Intel EM64T CPU 8.07 (alt) 28 Jun 2017, 1:13:32 UTC 0 GigaFLOPS https://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/beta/apps.php OK boys, fire up those Multi-core CPUs again. This time try using the Stock CPU App. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
I mean, I can understand situations where the "best" signal, of any type, still wouldn't be good enough to "report" as worthy of further investigation. However, it seems to me that if one or more signals do achieve that reportable threshold, that the "best" signal should be one of those. If it's not, it just seems really screwy to me. Out of sync, I guess. Perhaps the dictionary the scientists use has a different definition of "best" than the one most of us common folk use. ;^)How there can be a "best" signal that isn't worth reporting (when there are apparently 3 inferior signals that are) is beyond me, but that's apparently the standard. :^) |
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
I mean, I can understand situations where the "best" signal, of any type, still wouldn't be good enough to "report" as worthy of further investigation. However, it seems to me that if one or more signals do achieve that reportable threshold, that the "best" signal should be one of those. If it's not, it just seems really screwy to me. Out of sync, I guess. Perhaps the dictionary the scientists use has a different definition of "best" than the one most of us common folk use. ;^)How there can be a "best" signal that isn't worth reporting (when there are apparently 3 inferior signals that are) is beyond me, but that's apparently the standard. :^) Certainly something worthy of bringing up with Eric IMO. He may well examine the stock CPU code and say 'That's not what was intended', or say 'that's correct'. In terms of purpose, the 'best' is used for Screensaver display, so it would entirely make sense to me if the intent is to choose the most 'Gaussian-ey' looking signal to display, whether reportable or not (i.e . marketing). Naturally I can also see the point of view that if the score wasn't good enough to rep[ort, then why store it at all ? Unfortunately the CHiSq and null hypotheses aggravate a part of my brain that burned out on statistics long ago (as I was too good at it and fried that area of my brain), therefore I don't have definitive answers on what's meant to happen in this particular case. "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. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
Certainly something worthy of bringing up with Eric IMO. He may well examine the stock CPU code and say 'That's not what was intended', or say 'that's correct'.Yeah, that's definitely the key determination needed before any "fixing" gets done to whichever is not the "correct" path. Alternatively, I suppose, he could alter the validator so that it ignores Best Gaussian differences if all other signals match. In terms of purpose, the 'best' is used for Screensaver display, ....(i.e . marketing).Oh, goody. Perhaps they could also use that feature to hawk some limited edition SETI@home toasters to help fund the project! ;-P |
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
Still waiting on my Seti Toaster :( "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. |
Zalster Send message Joined: 27 May 99 Posts: 5517 Credit: 528,817,460 RAC: 242 |
|
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
Tweeted Eric: @SETIEric If a 'best Gaussian' looks more 'Guassianey' than the reportables, why may it not necessarily be reportable ? "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. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
They gots to actually be flying, dontcha know! |
Zalster Send message Joined: 27 May 99 Posts: 5517 Credit: 528,817,460 RAC: 242 |
lol |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
Tweeted Eric:Heh, I suppose it's just my old age, but I tend to have a hard time keeping a straight face when I read that somebody "Tweeted" something. It always seems about as frivolous as, oh I dunno, flying toasters perhaps! ;^D |
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
Tweeted Eric:Heh, I suppose it's just my old age, but I tend to have a hard time keeping a straight face when I read that somebody "Tweeted" something. It always seems about as frivolous as, oh I dunno, flying toasters perhaps! ;^D Oh you'd be surprised [as I was]. The immediacy bypasses all sorts of tradition and other impediments. Eliminates the old 'Chinese Whispers' (aka Fake news) "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. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
Oh you'd be surprised [as I was]. The immediacy bypasses all sorts of tradition and other impediments. Eliminates the old 'Chinese Whispers' (aka Fake news)TraDITION! Oh great, first Flying Toasters and now Fiddler on the Roof flashbacks. I think it's past my bedtime. |
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
Oh you'd be surprised [as I was]. The immediacy bypasses all sorts of tradition and other impediments. Eliminates the old 'Chinese Whispers' (aka Fake news)TraDITION! Oh great, first Flying Toasters and now Fiddler on the Roof flashbacks. I think it's past my bedtime. *opens beer* ... Guess my work here is done :) "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. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
Ah, but I guess I have one more post to make before cutting some ZZZs. And back on topic, too. After 14+ hours my Windows CPU (setiathome_8.00_windows_intelx86) bench of 23se08ac.6875.22968.6.33.135 just finished. TBar had indicated that he thought this WU was a bit of a problem case. He may have been right. My original post: Workunit 2573263722 (23se08ac.6875.22968.6.33.135)Well, it seems that in this case the "gold standard" agrees with SoG: <best_gaussian> <peak_power>3.7621715068817</peak_power> G'night. |
jason_gee Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0 |
Ah, but I guess I have one more post to make before cutting some ZZZs. And back on topic, too. After 14+ hours my Windows CPU (setiathome_8.00_windows_intelx86) bench of 23se08ac.6875.22968.6.33.135 just finished. TBar had indicated that he thought this WU was a bit of a problem case. He may have been right. My original post: Exactly. Note the Higher ChiSq. Therefore the Cuda 8 special one looks more 'Gaussianey' than the 8.22 SoG one. Hence my Tweet/Query to Eric. "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. |
Raistmer Send message Joined: 16 Jun 01 Posts: 6325 Credit: 106,370,077 RAC: 121 |
All those people testing these Apps at Beta and no one picked this up? Nevermind. And you was just one of them, if I recall correctly :D The right question to ask how non-reportable could be better than reportable one.?.... And in this test reportable comes later in processing chain so SoG operated in "no reportable so far" path again. SETI apps news We're not gonna fight them. We're gonna transcend them. |
Raistmer Send message Joined: 16 Jun 01 Posts: 6325 Credit: 106,370,077 RAC: 121 |
That's the right question. SETI apps news We're not gonna fight them. We're gonna transcend them. |
©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.