DPAD - JESUS !!!!!
- Thread starter Stormgiant
- Start date
JonB
Platinum Member
Assimilator1
Elite Member
- Nov 4, 1999
- 24,189
- 529
- 126
Originally posted by: Ken_g6
Hmmm.... How many days did it take for the best Muon transfer to rise again?
Hey, it's a new version of the client.
Kk
Assim,
The "Transfer rate" is a measure of the efficiency of the simulation. Each particle accelerator design has small variances. Some are more efficient than others. Some really ROCK. Some suck.
Since the crux of the project is to design the most efficient particle accelerator, more points are awarded for more efficient designs. There is a multiplier involved.
In other words, if you do 1000 results at a 1.030% transfer rate, and I do 400 results at a 6% transfer rate, you'll be eating my dust.
Does that help?
Actually DanC, your only partly right...
The stats are based on the amount of particles simulated. The higher the transfer rate of a particular simulation run, the more particles that are effectively simulated all the way to the end.
You're right with the comparison of "if you do 1000 results at a 1.030% transfer rate, and I do 400 results at a 6% transfer rate, you'll be eating my dust", but slightly wrong with the "There is a multiplier involved" part.
This project is similar in respect to others where the person with the most returned results or simulated particles is only the winner as far as the stats go, while the person with the highest transfer rate is the winner as far as helping out the project is concerned.
The stats are based on the amount of particles simulated. The higher the transfer rate of a particular simulation run, the more particles that are effectively simulated all the way to the end.
You're right with the comparison of "if you do 1000 results at a 1.030% transfer rate, and I do 400 results at a 6% transfer rate, you'll be eating my dust", but slightly wrong with the "There is a multiplier involved" part.
This project is similar in respect to others where the person with the most returned results or simulated particles is only the winner as far as the stats go, while the person with the highest transfer rate is the winner as far as helping out the project is concerned.
vss -
I'm certainly willing to concede that I may not fully understand the scoring, but I could swear I saw something with regard to the scores being multiplied in some way using some sort of weighting with regard to the transfer rate.
Then again... I could be up in the night.
Thanks for the clarification.
I'm certainly willing to concede that I may not fully understand the scoring, but I could swear I saw something with regard to the scores being multiplied in some way using some sort of weighting with regard to the transfer rate.
Then again... I could be up in the night.
Thanks for the clarification.
even w/ the high efficiencies from u dan C i am still not breaking 5
i am thinking more and more that ur 13, 15 % transfers are MUCh too high, possibly a fluke that needs to be checkd out
this did happen in the prior versions..
stephen estimated that the highest transfer should be around 9% by the end of 4.3xxx
just a heads up!
i am thinking more and more that ur 13, 15 % transfers are MUCh too high, possibly a fluke that needs to be checkd out
this did happen in the prior versions..
stephen estimated that the highest transfer should be around 9% by the end of 4.3xxx
just a heads up!
Assimilator1
Elite Member
- Nov 4, 1999
- 24,189
- 529
- 126
Assimilator1
Elite Member
- Nov 4, 1999
- 24,189
- 529
- 126
LMAO... let's HOPE so. heheh.
I still maintain there's a multiplier. Take a look at the stats, and you'll see people with more "results" but fewer "Mpts" (whatever the begeebers THAT is).
Until it's conclusively proven otherwise, I still maintain you get more points for results at a higher rate.
Maybe I'm just a butt-head (and there are those who'd argue I AM) - but it sure looks that way to me.
I still maintain there's a multiplier. Take a look at the stats, and you'll see people with more "results" but fewer "Mpts" (whatever the begeebers THAT is).
Until it's conclusively proven otherwise, I still maintain you get more points for results at a higher rate.
Maybe I'm just a butt-head (and there are those who'd argue I AM) - but it sure looks that way to me.
Assimilator1
Elite Member
- Nov 4, 1999
- 24,189
- 529
- 126
grrr ,I'm still getting intermittent problems with DAPD dropping out with the same error message I told you in my email
OK, best way to explain this is if we take a look at the last page of the stats results.
The first set of columns corresponding to the program build version, indicate how many results have been returned.... kinda like 1 Work Unit.
The second distinct column is the number of particles in the simulation (not entirely sure how this is figured).
Third and final distinct column is the transfer rate, which is basically how good the transfer was (ie. efficient). It is tied in to the particles simulated in the fact that the more efficient results you have, the higher the particles simulated.
That is how someone with less work units can be higher up than someone with more.... just through the fact that they have simulated more particles per unit with higher transfer rates.
This is how I see it, although I could be wrong - quantum physics was never really my strong point and I dont really care if it never is.
The first set of columns corresponding to the program build version, indicate how many results have been returned.... kinda like 1 Work Unit.
The second distinct column is the number of particles in the simulation (not entirely sure how this is figured).
Third and final distinct column is the transfer rate, which is basically how good the transfer was (ie. efficient). It is tied in to the particles simulated in the fact that the more efficient results you have, the higher the particles simulated.
That is how someone with less work units can be higher up than someone with more.... just through the fact that they have simulated more particles per unit with higher transfer rates.
This is how I see it, although I could be wrong - quantum physics was never really my strong point and I dont really care if it never is.
Hey - I can get behind that :Q
It's all about particles. Works for me.
Assim,
I'm confused about your errors. Have you tried command-line?
For instance - I can't run the graphical version on my primary machine, though command-line and background run fine.
:Q It's all about particles. Works for me.
Assim,
I'm confused about your errors. Have you tried command-line?
For instance - I can't run the graphical version on my primary machine, though command-line and background run fine.
I've been having some troubles with the new version of DPAD also; hoping that I have it all straightened out.
Oddly, running it as a FireDaemon service, after a while on both machines I would get a Program Exception Fault error, and from that point on DPAD would stop crunching. Running the muon1_background client.
Cleaned off and reinstalled. Hoping that it had something to do with the way I installed from one machine to the other (badly). Think I may have duplicated the queue, causing the server to not be able to determine a difference between machines. Dunno.
Oddly, running it as a FireDaemon service, after a while on both machines I would get a Program Exception Fault error, and from that point on DPAD would stop crunching. Running the muon1_background client.
Cleaned off and reinstalled. Hoping that it had something to do with the way I installed from one machine to the other (badly). Think I may have duplicated the queue, causing the server to not be able to determine a difference between machines. Dunno.
That's some awesome transfer rate! :Q
And thanks for the excellent explanation of how the stats work, vss1980.
And thanks for the excellent explanation of how the stats work, vss1980.
A little digging on Stephen Brooks' web page is very telling... Apparently, I downloaded 4.31a and did not realize that a 4.31b was released to address a buffer overrun that causes it to crash... Every time I run it.
Maybe now I can make some progress.
Apparently, I downloaded 4.31a and did not realize that a 4.31b was released to address a buffer overrun that causes it to crash... Every time I run it. Maybe now I can make some progress.
Assimilator1
Elite Member
- Nov 4, 1999
- 24,189
- 529
- 126
Maybe thats my problem too?
Gonna check what version I have.
Wierd thing was if I ran either from the shortcuts in my programs menu it would instantly crash but if loaded the exe directly it would run for some while!
[edit]yeah I have v431a ,off to get b!
grrr ,getting the same problem with 431b too:| (as is in it only run if I load the exe directly!...sometimes!)
Gonna check what version I have.
Wierd thing was if I ran either from the shortcuts in my programs menu it would instantly crash but if loaded the exe directly it would run for some while!
[edit]yeah I have v431a ,off to get b!
grrr ,getting the same problem with 431b too:|
(as is in it only run if I load the exe directly!...sometimes!)Looking at the stats DPC has us beat in muon transfer % but by looking at overall score we are up there!...hopefully the teamstats page will be generated soon
also....even w/ the good seeds and everything i am still getting only in the 5.xx region..odd! what are u guys getting MOST of (i.e. not the odd outlier)
also....even w/ the good seeds and everything i am still getting only in the 5.xx region..odd! what are u guys getting MOST of (i.e. not the odd outlier)
YEAH!!!! GO TA!
*I suspect you may be running just a machine or 10 more than me
- but GO, GO, GO! heheheh....TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter