Message boards :
Number crunching :
UPDATE: started some new searches, submitted a paper to GECCO 2008
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
Hi Everybody, Sorry i've not been able to have as much time in the forums lately -- we had the camera ready version of the HCW paper due monday, and the GECCO paper due today, so i've been quite busy writing and putting all the results you've given us down into the paper. Hopefully the GECCO paper will be accepted and when it is, i'll give you all a link to it to read. The results are quite good - you're crunching as fast as the large partition of the bluegene we have access to (1,024 processors). better yet, unlike the bluegene you're available 24/7 and we don't have to compete with other researchers :D The asynchronous genetic search/simplex hybrid is performing really well, and while not as fast as it's synchronous counterpart it is still quite good. The results also show that by with some fine tuning we'll be able to improve the performance even more. I've started up two new searches (gs_170..174 and gs_180..184) that further the results we have in the GECCO paper. They've refined the search a bit and are using more points in the hybrid simplex operator we've been using. I also hope to start some particle swarm searches up and running again shortly. We've also been in the process of looking at some new undergraduates to work with our project to take care of the server and help with compiling binaries and that type of thing, so hopefully that will also help clean up a bunch of the bugs we've been having. cheers everybody, and thanks for continuing to work with us :D |
Send message Joined: 12 Nov 07 Posts: 2425 Credit: 524,164 RAC: 0 |
Thanks for the update. |
Send message Joined: 8 Oct 07 Posts: 289 Credit: 3,690,838 RAC: 0 |
snip...
Thats great news Travis -thanks for the update:) Does that mean the results will take longer because you are using more points? |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 07 Posts: 280 Credit: 2,442,757 RAC: 0 |
Does that mean the results will take longer because you are using more points? Thanks for the update, Travis - stuff like this makes it all worthwhile :) JRenkar, simply visually comparing progress of a gs_160 and a gs_170, they seem to be going about as fast on my laptop (about 0.095% each refresh) |
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
Does that mean the results will take longer because you are using more points? right now i think we'll just be using the convolution code, so the work units will be longer. once nate starts searches, there will be different numbers of points, and different star wedges, so who knows how long WUs will take :) |
Send message Joined: 12 Nov 07 Posts: 2425 Credit: 524,164 RAC: 0 |
I've had 3 193's run longer than usual, doesn't seem like any problems, 27:47, 29:49, and 30:05 min, as compared to a 24 min average. |
Send message Joined: 16 Dec 07 Posts: 37 Credit: 24,358,816 RAC: 5,739 |
I'd like to read your next paper I found your last one quite interesting. |
©2024 Astroinformatics Group