Please visit donation page to help the project cover running costs for this month

Toggle Menu

Join PrimeGrid

Returning Participants


Leader Boards



1) Message boards : Number crunching : 2014 PrimeGrid Challenge Series ideas (Message 69339)
Posted 2242 days ago by CGKIII
- Yes to SR5, seems to be a sweet spot right now.

- Yes to a 1-day challenge. As mentioned above, exciting (for some) resource-management problem, moreso than usual.

- I like the idea of a Cullen challenge getting in the rotation. I like the idea of exposing people to work they don't normally do, at least for short bursts.

- In the same idea, perhaps we consider some sort of 2 or 3-year templated challenge rotation. Looks like there's just a bit too many types of work for 1 year to catch 'em all, but not so many that we can't keep a few favorites each year. Not sure what this would look like exactly, but it might come down to alternating things like GFN / SoB, Cullen / Woodall, PPS Sieve / TRP Sieve. And then adjusting the schedule based on challenge length / seasonality / overlap with PRPnet challenges, etc. Of course, force a spot for a new work type (like the SR5 this year). I think 8-12 challenges / year is about right.

- Perhaps we should consider extending the scoring positions beyond 200 places? I don't know how long the challenge system has existed, but I think it's multiple years. Not sure where the 200 spot number came from, but my initial guess is that it was to weed out all the single-task performances and excessively light contributors (and maybe it's as much as the administration wanted to handle). I'd like to imagine participation has grown such that spots 201 thru (some number here, maybe 300/400/500/1000) are actually contributing a reasonable amount, and I'd hope that it's not terribly hard to adjust the scoring algorithm appropriately (perhaps breaking backward-compatibility, but with different challenge lengths for the same work, I doubt they are comparable currently anyway). With more challenges in the year, this might drum up a bit more enthusiasm, with people thinking "Well, I might not be able to crack spot 200 in any given challenge, but I will do them all around a spot-350 pace, and maybe that'd be enough reliability to get me around 200th when all is said and done at the end of the year." If 200 is still a good cut-off, keep it, just throwing out ideas.

- Regarding the proposed long challenge in January, I am on board with that. It does penalize those in the southern hemisphere, but it is the most likely way to guarantee clean-up by the end of the year. I could see moving this to March / April. You might also consider (not very heavily) the CPU / GPU release cycle. Not sure if those first-in-line (or maybe the wave of folks after the guinea pigs) would be eager to see how many of the big WUs they could crank out with new metal.

- If we do GFN, I really like the idea of combining GFN and GFN WR, with an additional bonus to the WR tasks.

These next few points aren't necessarily asking for answers, but they're things I would consider if I had the information that would answer them.

- If we do GFN / GFN WR + SoB in 2014, what do we do in 2015 if it's (subjectively measured as) a success? What if it's not?

- If we do GFN / GFN WR in 2014, would we skip SoB in 2014 and then move it to 2015? By 2015, how long will SoB tasks be / how long will the challenge have to last? (I imagine that the data exists to look at how task length has been changing over time, and this would be easy-ish to project.)

- If we do SoB in 2014, would we skip GFN / GFN WR in 2014 and then move it to 2015? By 2015, how long will GFN tasks be / how long will the challenge have to last? (Probably a harder one to estimate.)

- If we did GFN / GFN WR in 2014 and then SoB separately in 2014 (say, January and March), then what would 2015 look like?

- Are there a "significant" amount of undiagnosable / time-consuming to fix errors going on with any of the above that would cause headaches to new participants with those work types? That is, if someone tried to participate and they were out of commission for, say, 2 days trying to work through an issue, would that be enough to make them unable to get credit? If there are these errors, do we think that they will be solved before a challenge in 2014? 2015?

Hope this helps.
2) Message boards : Project Staging Area : New upgraded PRPNet (test) server (Message 69014)
Posted 2255 days ago by CGKIII
I've looked at the web pages on the test server for a handful of ports. They look reasonable (similar to the active server).
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Bonus Credit Experiment (Message 67288)
Posted 2330 days ago by CGKIII
If a subproject qualifies for more than one (such as SoB), are the bonuses additive or multiplicative?
4) Message boards : Problems and Help : Mac OS X box grabbed 900 SR5 tasks - Only command line access (Message 66701)
Posted 2340 days ago by CGKIII
Oh, guess I was reading that wrong. Thanks for the quick investigation and reply. Good to see everything is okay.
5) Message boards : Problems and Help : Mac OS X box grabbed 900 SR5 tasks - Only command line access (Message 66699)
Posted 2340 days ago by CGKIII
I have a Mac OS X box that just started crunching SR5 today (has been doing PPS for the past few months). It looks like it's using BOINC 7.0.31.

Unfortunately, it grabbed about 900 tasks, and I only have remote command-line access to it over the weekend. It wouldn't be a big deal, except we have a challenge starting shortly, and I'd like to have this machine working on it.

The machine details are here, if that helps -

I found some information on a boinccmd tool, but I can't find that on my machine, and don't know where to go to acquire it.

If someone would be able to point me in the right direction, I'd greatly appreciate it. Even if I can't get this figured out before Monday, it will be useful information in the future in case something goes awry when I don't have physical access to that computer.

6) Message boards : Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5 Problem : SR5 Moving to BOINC; We Need More Sieving! (Message 66099)
Posted 2357 days ago by CGKIII
That sounds reasonable. I did a 150G range in about 7.5 hours or so on an i7 3770k @ 3.5 GHz (4 threads). That's a bit faster than your pace, but definitely comparable.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : New badge proposal - discuss! (Message 64831)
Posted 2383 days ago by CGKIII
I like this idea.

I think an ``all-at-once'' approach would be best, with a reevaluation again sometime in the (ideally, not very distant) future when we break through these.

Don't particularly like the Onyx / Black idea, as it feel a bit too ``final,'' but perhaps any future sets would have images in a different style.

It would be neat for all the new badges to have white text (most of the proposed ones do already). That would be a nice subtle distinguishing mark.

The goal values aren't spaced very nicely. 2.5xRuby to the next level is fine. Then 5x that to the next is fine. But then we go to 2x for jade? And then bump it up to 10x, 10x, 10x? A bit more consistency would be nice, I think.

Perhaps something like this (depending on how many levels you want, double for the sieve values of course):
5M (2.5x increase, slightly more than the 2x's we've got going on right now)
20M (4x increase, bumps it up, still a round number)
100 M (5x, nice)
500 M (5x)
2 B (4x, but a nice number)
10 B (5x)
50 B (5x)
250 B (5x)
1 T (4x, but a nice number)
8) Message boards : News : Cheaters' credits rescinded (Message 64477)
Posted 2395 days ago by CGKIII
If results were faked, that means a significant amount of work will need to be redone / revalidated, correct?
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Badges (Message 56666)
Posted 2667 days ago by CGKIII
SGS bronze! Now back to PPS LLRs in search of an elusive prime. Hard to believe that badges are actually incenting me to change some of my habits, but they have been...
[Return to PrimeGrid main page]
Copyright © 2005 - 2019 Rytis Slatkevičius (contact) and PrimeGrid community. Server load 2.96, 2.58, 2.31
Generated 11 Nov 2019 | 21:10:29 UTC