Message boards :
LHC@home Science :
Why only one result
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
I was very excited to get some tasks from LHC@home. I am running the project on two superb Core 2 Duo machines, and I saw tasks on both. Yet, I only have one result. I do not understand why other tasks failed. >>RSM Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
Send message Joined: 15 Mar 07 Posts: 11 Credit: 1,038 RAC: 0 |
They not reward for result that "crash into the walls" ; also you probably checked late you had more then one result but all "failed". you put more then 1.5 seconds cpu time on your side for sure but you not going to be rewarded for it. Even if it is not looking fair , live with it like me for now until a project admin hear about it :( check other thread about overcloking also |
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
They not reward for result that "crash into the walls" ; QUESTIONS What means "crash into walls"? I saw all of the failures in results, that is why I posted my question. What means " you put more then 1.5 seconds cpu time on your side for sure but you not going to be rewarded for it." I do not have any overclocking on my machines. >>RSM Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
Send message Joined: 18 Feb 06 Posts: 8 Credit: 13,541 RAC: 0 |
Crash into the walls refers to those runs on sixtrack that finish extremely quickly because the simulated magnet configuration leads to a particle stream that is unstable or misdirected and the particles crash into the walls of the loop rather than spinning around in a coherent stream. I am a lay person so there maybe someone who can give a more technical explanation but this is the gist of it. I crunch on a dual core with no problems but these very short "crash and burn" runs sometimes don't crunch for long enough to gain credits. However, its v. useful for the scientists to know that certain set ups bring disasterous results. |
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
O.K., I understand now, that the crashing has not to do with my crunching, but the project design of the task. So, I am sticking with it. I am interested in C.E.R.N. since 1991, when I watched a film, "Creation of the Universe", narrated by Timothy Ferris. It visited C.E.R.N. and FERMI labs and I was hooked. So, lets get somehthing going. >>RSM Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
Send message Joined: 15 Mar 07 Posts: 11 Credit: 1,038 RAC: 0 |
because your computer will put for exemple one hour to compute the unit , but when you check on the website it says 0.0 seonds to a few seconds, with zero reward. QUESTIONS What means "crash into walls"? I saw all of the failures in results, that is why I posted my question. What means " you put more then 1.5 seconds cpu time on your side for sure but you not going to be rewarded for it." I do not have any overclocking on my machines. >>RSM [/quote] |
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
I think I learned about "crashing into walls". In the LHC forum at allprojectstats.com, John Hunt gave a link to a bunch of YouTube videos about the LHC at CERN. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJPMfnz2E In one video, produced at Google, a woman from Berkeley is giving a lecture about LHC. She says that in a New Yorker article about LHC looking for Higgs, it will be like "finding a needle in a needle factory." I searched on the phrase with only the domain newyorker.com and came up with it. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/05/14/070514fa_fact_kolbert?currentPage=all The author says that it takes 1800 times the energy to push as proton as it does an electron or positron, and that all particles want to go straight, so I think that very simply tells us why we are not getting a good result when the task experiences this result of "crash into walls." I recommend the videos and the article. >>RSM Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
I think I learned about "crashing into walls". Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
I missed erred in the URL for the videos, left out a character. Should be http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fJPMfnz2E Sorry. >>RSM Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
Send message Joined: 14 Nov 05 Posts: 32 Credit: 712,132 RAC: 60 |
It is disheartening to wait for weeks, only to get 2 work units that immediately crash into the walls (processing time < 2 sec) and then find that there are no more WU's to distribute. I guess I'll wait another month to (maybe) get some work.... |
Send message Joined: 14 Nov 05 Posts: 32 Credit: 712,132 RAC: 60 |
Why not start the credit calculations at ...say...50, instead of zero. That way you get some credit for running one that crashes into the walls. Afterall, that's good to know....right? It's not like we can do anything with the credits. I can't cash them in for Linden dollars in Second Life can I? I would be nice to look at the stats tab and see at least a little bump every couple of weeks. |
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
Why not start the credit calculations at ...say...50, instead of zero. That way you get some credit for running one that crashes into the walls. Afterall, that's good to know....right? I understand the need to volunteer even if at first there are all of the failures. If you believe in the LHC as a scientific endeavor, then whatever happens with our tasks is a help. I personally am fascinated by the work at C.E.R.N. since 1985. So, I am delighted to be on this project. If you go to http://www.allprojectstats.com and visit the LHC forum, there are links to videos about C.E.R.N. and LHC, even Dr Higgs himself. >>RSM Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
Hey- Things are looking up. I now have 4 successes out of seven tasks. >>RSM Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
Send message Joined: 4 Feb 07 Posts: 1 Credit: 1,715 RAC: 0 |
Hey, I was wondering if it wouldn't be better if a computer first tries the WU's. I mean that it runs a WU for say 2-3 seconds and if it doesn't crash into the walls then it is send to the volunteers on the grid. I think it would save a lot of bandwidth, the waiting for WU's to complete (because they are in a wait list on one of the volunteers' computers), and maybe even more trouble(?)... If course that pc would put a delay on the final processing, one should test if it would make a profit in time/bandwidth |
Send message Joined: 20 Dec 07 Posts: 69 Credit: 599,151 RAC: 0 |
O.K., I now have had two successful tasks on each of my two computers. I have three failures, possibly from the "crashing into walls" business. What I would like to know is, when these simulations run as tasks via BOINC, and when they fail, are we testing the simulation process in BOINC, which is certainly fine with me, or, are we testing simulations of tasks that will actually go into the LHC? >>RSM Please check out my blog http://sciencesprings.wordpress.com http://facebook.com/sciencesprings |
©2024 CERN