LHC@home

(I couldn't find this answer specifically on the Unofficial Boinc Wiki and I am not sure if it's a bug @ LHC.. so here goes)

IIRC, and please correct me on this one, If a given user continually and consistently returns bad results such as those which complete in seconds (or less) and report 'client error' isn't their maximum daily WU quota supposed to be reduced by a certain factor of "x" per bad result per day? I came across this user today while reviewing my ever-growing pending queue. He has 3 successful results out of 80 yet his quota is set for 100/day.

Is there a time delay (in days/hours/etc) before a user would be penalized? It looks like the user in this example is new and has only been crunching since 14 September, however shouldn't that have already been enough time for the quota to be reduced by some number?

I'm aware factors on the user's computer such as overclocking, virii/spyware, running out of hard drive space, or bad hardware can cause WUs to error out - though I'm far less concerned about the cause of the problem, only the fact it appears his WU quota has not been affected.

:)

---

<blockquote>
IIRC, and please correct me on this one, If a given user continually and consistently returns bad results such as those which complete in seconds (or less) and report 'client error' isn't their maximum daily WU quota supposed to be reduced by a certain factor of "x" per bad result per day? I came across this user today while reviewing my ever-growing pending queue. He has 3 successful results out of 80 yet his quota is set for 100/day.

Is there a time delay (in days/hours/etc) before a user would be penalized? It looks like the user in this example is new and has only been crunching since 14 September, however shouldn't that have already been enough time for the quota to be reduced by some number?
</blockquote>

The download quota is the same for everybody, currently it's set to 100 results (result = instance of workunit) per day. If an user has problems it can happen that all the 100 results fail immediately, but it's not a big problem. The server just generates more results and sends them to other users. The only drawback is that the server has to do bit of extra work. In other words, we are not very concerned about this as long as it's not too common.

---

Markku Degerholm
LHC@home admin

Hi, I'm new to this project (just signed up tonight, and was debating whether to wait a couple days or not to pull my first WUs, as I'm upgrading to an Athlon 64 in a coupla days or so, when the hardware arrives in the mail), so am not sure if this applies here. But on Predictor@home (where they do have an initial 100 WU quota/day, and then decrease it for bad results; a problem can (or at least there, had) creeped up.

Basically, if it happens enough (and it has, over there); a WU can end up returning a too many results error, in which case 1. the WU is scrapped as bad, and 2. those who contributed potentially good results don't get credit as it's short a result for validation. Is that an issue over here, and if so, how often has this come up?

---

<blockquote>Hi, I'm new to this project (just signed up tonight, and was debating whether to wait a couple days or not to pull my first WUs, as I'm upgrading to an Athlon 64 in a coupla days or so, when the hardware arrives in the mail), so am not sure if this applies here. But on Predictor@home (where they do have an initial 100 WU quota/day, and then decrease it for bad results; a problem can (or at least there, had) creeped up.

Basically, if it happens enough (and it has, over there); a WU can end up returning a too many results error, in which case 1. the WU is scrapped as bad, and 2. those who contributed potentially good results don't get credit as it's short a result for validation. Is that an issue over here, and if so, how often has this come up?</blockquote>
It is not that common. And that is a feature of the BOINC System and can appear in any project. In short, if you send back a Result that is incorrect for ANY project, you will usually get 0 credit. Here, you can get a consolation prize of credit in some cases (though there seems to be a question if they are added in correctly).

I grant that I generate enough results that I do not really notice the occasional one that is "bad", but, it makes sense when you think about it. Why should anyone get credit for a result that has no value to a project?

In part this is one of the mechanisms that was developed in the face of the "cheating" that went on (and still goes on?) in SETI@Home Classic where you get a credit bump for any and all results returned regardless of quality ...

---