rpi_logo
adaptive validation
adaptive validation
log in

Advanced search

Message boards : News : adaptive validation

Author Message
Profile Travis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0

Message 42641 - Posted: 6 Oct 2010, 17:48:36 UTC

I've turned on adaptive validation, so let me know if you're having any validation issues. What's going to happen now is that all results that would improve our searches are still always validated. However, those that won't improve our searches will be validated based on your error rate. The more bad results you return the more frequently your workunits will require validation.
____________

Logforme
Send message
Joined: 13 Aug 10
Posts: 10
Credit: 115,791,153
RAC: 0

Message 42698 - Posted: 9 Oct 2010, 7:08:25 UTC - in response to Message 42641.

However, those that won't improve our searches will be validated based on your error rate.


Not at all familiar with the science here but I just gotta ask:

If you know beforehand that a WU will not improve your search, why send it to a client?

Dr. Ronald C. Spencer
Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 08
Posts: 13
Credit: 528,633
RAC: 269

Message 42704 - Posted: 9 Oct 2010, 12:48:44 UTC - in response to Message 42698.

Well,
I'm not a project scientist and I originally asked the question and after thinking about it only the computer at the science lab would be able to pick up on that because humans just can't handle thousands of results manually. That would cause a huge headache :)

Dr. Ronald C. Spencer

Emeritus Astronomer: The American Astronomical Society
Member: The Division for Planetary Sciences of the AAS
Member: The American Association of Variable Star Observers
Member: The Astronomical society of the Pacific
Member: The planetary Society

I have concluded that Travis is doing the best he can.

Profile Travis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0

Message 42725 - Posted: 10 Oct 2010, 15:20:44 UTC - in response to Message 42698.

However, those that won't improve our searches will be validated based on your error rate.


Not at all familiar with the science here but I just gotta ask:

If you know beforehand that a WU will not improve your search, why send it to a client?


We don't know beforehand. That's why we wait for the result to come back and see if the fitness that you calculated is better than the fitness of the members of our search population. If it will improve the search, we validate it first. If it won't, then we validate it based on your error rate.
____________

Logforme
Send message
Joined: 13 Aug 10
Posts: 10
Credit: 115,791,153
RAC: 0

Message 42733 - Posted: 10 Oct 2010, 20:51:03 UTC - in response to Message 42725.

We don't know beforehand. That's why we wait for the result to come back and see if the fitness that you calculated is better than the fitness of the members of our search population. If it will improve the search, we validate it first. If it won't, then we validate it based on your error rate.


Ok. So all WUs have "minimum quorum" set to 1. Then you decide to send it out again after getting the result.
Thought maybe you had some magic way of setting minimum quorum to 1 or 2 before sending a WU to the first client.

Profile banditwolf
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0

Message 42735 - Posted: 10 Oct 2010, 21:52:42 UTC - in response to Message 42733.

Ok. So all WUs have "minimum quorum" set to 1. Then you decide to send it out again after getting the result.

It has done this for some time now.
____________
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

Profile Travis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0

Message 42742 - Posted: 10 Oct 2010, 23:26:34 UTC - in response to Message 42735.

Ok. So all WUs have "minimum quorum" set to 1. Then you decide to send it out again after getting the result.

It has done this for some time now.


Yeah, that's how it works.
____________

Profile mdhittle*
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Jun 10
Posts: 284
Credit: 260,490,091
RAC: 0

Message 42743 - Posted: 10 Oct 2010, 23:29:17 UTC - in response to Message 42742.

Yeah, that's how it works.


When it is working:

separation_assimilator milkyway Not Running

Workunits waiting for validation 41,370


Post to thread

Message boards : News : adaptive validation


Main page · Your account · Message boards


Copyright © 2018 AstroInformatics Group