Posts by abc@home staff

1) Message boards : Number crunching : moving (Message 6754)
Posted 2036 days ago by abc@home staff

I'm going to move to another country, so I won't have much time for abc anymore. The project will continue though, there are more people besides me involved.
I'd thought it would be better to let you guys know.

2) Message boards : Number crunching : how to rise triplet counts (Message 6747)
Posted 2036 days ago by abc@home staff

Hi fwjmath,

I've explained everything already to nikolaus in another thread:

http://abcathome.com/forum_thread.php?id=275

You're right, the global picture is very important, the individual triples with
low quality are not important.

3) Message boards : Number crunching : how to rise triplet counts (Message 6744)
Posted 2036 days ago by abc@home staff

dear ABC Crunchers, after downloading only 5 to 10 every time and crunching them before downloading the next , aswell aborting all downloaded workunits which have already reported a result the triplet count is sky rocketing. Before I had some 2 to 4 triplets a day now I am up in the 30 ties a day.
Try it , it works.
nikolaus

That will really help, in the end everybody will be aborting workunits, thus
no verification can be done, hence nobody will 'get' *any* triples.

If you're so fond of triples, I advise you to read something up about abc triples
and find a formula to generate infinitely many of them:
a=1, b=3^2^k-1, c=3^2^k , and start counting for k=1, k=2 till infinity, you'll have all the triples you'll ever want and stop worrying.

To counteract this behaviour, I added a randomizer that randomly picks a result
from the result set and uses that user to attribute triples to.

4) Message boards : Number crunching : Pending credit (Message 6711)
Posted 2040 days ago by abc@home staff

Yesterday I reset it to 150.

5) Message boards : Number crunching : why are the triplets only valid for the first to turn in a result? (Message 6703)
Posted 2041 days ago by abc@home staff

Thanks, in fact we don't slap anyone :)
It is not a political game I'm playing here, this topic has come
up a few times before, the reasons are the database that is
going to hold all the data, how boinc works with canonical results,
and last but not least the way the website displaying your stats has
been built and now the people that built it are gone.

Thanks for the explanation but as both crucher get the same credit its just one command line more to make sure that both as well get the same triplets accounted . Sad to here the programmers are gone. ( hopefully you did not shoot them after finishing the programming) Are there others who cold take care to add this programm line? or is it a principle not to do it?
best regards and thanks again for the rapid response
Nikolaus

They were webprogrammers, unfortunately I can't state my opinion here as a representant of abc@home about webdevs and shooting.
It's not just one commandline in the code, I can
add things in the assimilator with the result vector, so that can be done,
but the database would become a problem.
Then the stats on the webpage, one day, *some day*, I would like
abc stats on abcathome.com by just logging in, not that you've to go through rekenmeemetabc, then that could be changed.

To sum it up, if someone is going to change the webstats, and the database
can 'hold' it, yes it's possible.
I understand your viewpoint and it's right,
what we have now is a compromise, but changing it involves quite some work
and extra load we don't like from the project side.

6) Message boards : Number crunching : why are the triplets only valid for the first to turn in a result? (Message 6698)
Posted 2041 days ago by abc@home staff

Thanks, in fact we don't slap anyone :)
It is not a political game I'm playing here, this topic has come
up a few times before, the reasons are the database that is
going to hold all the data, how boinc works with canonical results,
and last but not least the way the website displaying your stats has
been built and now the people that built it are gone.

7) Message boards : Number crunching : 1000 credits for 1 WU! (Message 6695)
Posted 2041 days ago by abc@home staff

No idea what all the ad homimem is about and why the admins are tolerating this is beyond me.... must be the overly tolerant Dutch streak. While i think this to be a fun math project, at least RekenMeeMetABC site conveys that image, threads like these certainly do not promote this fun feeling. Something the admins may want to reflect upon.

There's been a thread opened at BOINC discussing future formulation of credits, that meet both a project stimulation needs, yet continues to fit within the cross-project comparing as so many sites do at e.g. BOINCstats or BOINCcombined, where the graph, link below, shows interesting variations on who are the hi/low/middle of the road creditors. Sadly ABC@Home has not made it into the matrix yet, maybe something Hendrik would want to promote, so at least we know how things measure up, for those that do want to measure up.

http://boinc.netsoft-online.com/e107_plugins/boinc/get_cpcs.php

One thing for the fun part.... I'm still missing why in a quorum an identified tripple is assigned only to the fastest returning a work unit, or whatever rule that decides for it to go to only one in a quorum. Why not show it in the tally for all that found a match? That way, partners could find each-other in the result. ATM a 'I found this hi quality tripple' does not do right to the other silent partner which was demoted to simply being an anonymous verifier. Those are just left with the credits.

You're forgetting that hardly anybody posts at all on rekenmeemetabc.nl and
it only has a few visitors, almost everything happens here.
The "overly tolerating Dutch streak" is not censoring people, if people have something to say let's hear it, as long if it's not going beyond the limits.
We have a few moderators now who should take care of that.

It is not my task to promote credit comparisons on sites I don't even know,
I have enough to do as it is.
If it is not good I will hear it from the abc users and adjust accordingly,
like I've always done.

I explained before that this is due to the databases that need to have all this data and the way boinc works with canonical workunits. Maybe it will change
in the future, I don't know.

8) Message boards : Number crunching : Pending credit (Message 6654)
Posted 2043 days ago by abc@home staff

Is this a new feature of boinc software or a combination of daily result quota
and max_wus_to_send and min_sendwork_interval?

9) Message boards : Wish list : Link back to new message board layout (Message 6643)
Posted 2043 days ago by abc@home staff

yeah true, I hate it too, haven't had time to hack it into.
I don't like the way boinc set up the forums originally, with Q&A seperated etc,
keeping it simple is usually the best.

10) Message boards : Problems : DOES NOT COMPUTE? (Message 6628)
Posted 2043 days ago by abc@home staff

As additional information, it seemed you requested two workunits
at the same time, one with the 6 param in it and one with 8.
I don't know what happened, but I suspect somehow the inputfile
of one workunit ended up in the slot of the 8 workunit.
This is something boinc did wrong, where it did go wrong
I have no idea, maybe at the server side or at the client side.

Next 10 posts