Seti Wus from 1999

Spacehead

Lifer
Jun 2, 2002
13,201
10,063
136
Haven't run the BOINC SETI client, but doesn't it analyze different data than the older classic client?
 

networkman

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
10,436
1
0
Yes, it does. Compared to the original clients that were used (pre-dating me even joining TA to do S@H), nowadays clients are scanning for doubles, triples, guassians and other info in ways that didn't exist previously. I've also read that the data previously recorded may also be scanned(presumably in seperate projects) for anomalies not even Seti related, like pulsars and quasars.
 

Assimilator1

Elite Member
Nov 4, 1999
24,120
507
126
Originally posted by: SirUlli
Originally posted by: Assimilator1
Where do you see 1999?:confused:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/sah_status.html

Splitter Status

Tape 4 or on my Host

http://home.teleos-web.de/ubrinkschmidt/test/seti_1999.jpg

and this just before 7 years on Seti...

Greetings from Germany
Sir Ulli
Don't see anything on the SETI site (even under splitter status) saying 1999:confused:

As for your link ,I've no idea what the WU numbers mean ,you saying 99=1999? (and that the 1st bit is date/month?)

I guess if their carrying out a better search of the WUs than previously then their is some worth in redoing some old WUs.
 

Spacehead

Lifer
Jun 2, 2002
13,201
10,063
136
Splitter tapes are labeled, for example, 27ap03aa... meaning that tape was recorded on the 27th of April, 2003.
 

Rattledagger

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
2,989
18
81
Originally posted by: Assimilator1
Don't see anything on the SETI site (even under splitter status) saying 1999:confused:

As for your link ,I've no idea what the WU numbers mean ,you saying 99=1999? (and that the 1st bit is date/month?)

I guess if their carrying out a better search of the WUs than previously then their is some worth in redoing some old WUs.

The 1999-tape is finished splitting, so isn't showing-up on the status-page any longer.

A full "Task"- (result)-description is example:

13jn02aa.24708.5249.723592.3.182_2_0

13jn02aa = date started recorded, meaning this is 13 June 2002. aa is 1st. tape this day, ab is 2nd, and ac is 3rd. tape (not common).

24708 = process-id on the Splitter-process responsible for splitting now. Stopping & re-starting splitter will give a different process-id.

5249 = "block"-number, as mentioned on Status-page, each "block" is roughly 1.7 seconds recorded data, and each tape contains roughly 33k "blocks". So basically, how long out on a tape you are.
Due to some overlap between wu to make sure all signal-types can be detected, splitter reads-in 48 "blocks"...

723592 = byte-offset from last block split or something, not sure but the higher the 182-part is it's possible byte-offset is also higher...

3 = new parameter, has to do with Science Database-configuration, to speed-up Assimilation. Can normally be the same for many months...

182 = one of the 256 "pieces". Seti records a 2.5 MHz wide band sentered around 1.42GHz, but giving-out the full 2.5 MHz is much too big, so it's divided into 256 "pieces" each of 9766 Hz. These "pieces" is numbered 0 to 255.


The last 2 things is not part of the wu, but for BOINC to track the different unique Tasks (Results) for a wu:

_2 = shows which of Tasks (results) for a wu this is, and shows order is generated. Starts at _0 and increases upwards. Meaning _2 is the 3rd. Task generated. Note, BOINC does not need to send-out the Tasks in the same order as specified, so _3 can be sent-out earlier than _0.
For seti, _4 and higher indicates atleast one Task reported as error, or past deadline.

_0 = result-file to upload. _0 AFAIK means there's only 1 result-file. With example BBC/CPDN, the various result-files is numbered _1, _2, _3, ... _16 (for 16 total).



As for why there's some "old" tapes being distributed, as mentioned in Technical News, this is from tapes that for various reasons is missing an usable Scientific Result for many of the tapes wu.
 

sswingle

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2000
7,183
45
91
Even if it was older data, if aliens are out there, it doesn't matter if its a few years old, it would have taken thousands to get to us in the first place.
 

Assimilator1

Elite Member
Nov 4, 1999
24,120
507
126
No not necassarily ,their are many star systems which are less than a 1000 light years away ,& some less than 100 light years away.
It would depend where a signal came from.

But your right it doesn't matter if the data is a few years old :),as long as its not already been fully crunched.