Credit being added to my account

[Gordon]

I normally have my two GTX-660's working on units handed out by the gpu72 project. When they complete a batch of exponents I will hark back to the good old days of factoring and spend half a day or so working on high (>225m) exponents.

I recently took the range 230285000 up to about 2303xxxxx or so. I ran the query on this page

http://www.mersenne.org/report_factoring_effort/

making certain that I ticked the box to "exclude currently assigned exponents"

Up until this morning (Monday) the top producers showed this

79 Gordon Spence 25653.049 33937 614

Just checked my details, it now shows this

79 Gordon Spence 25652.371 33920 614

So why are results being systematically removed from my account. This isn't the first time either....

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by Gordon

79 Gordon Spence 25653.049 33937 614

Just checked my details, it now shows this

79 Gordon Spence 25652.371 33920 614

So why are results being systematically removed from my account. This isn't the first time either....

The general report shows the last 365 days. Maybe you worked a bit harder a year ago than you did recently.

[ATH]

Here is the lifetime list, start date just have to be before 2008:
http://www.mersenne.org/report_top_5...&B1=Get+Report

136 Gordon Spence 26918.919 96539 1622 | 286 35 9 1

[TheMawn]

Yup. That's the 365-day list. It's a lot shorter and it's a more "current" version of who is doing what. More relevant.

P.S. be careful with the 200M range as it is being actively worked on. Excluding currently assigned exponents won't be all that helpful unless you grab work on a daily-ish basis. If you grab the very first non-assigned exponent in the list I guarantee someone else will grab it before you finish.

If you go even a few hundred thousand up from the leading edge, it's a bit safer. Overall, it wouldn't be a huge deal if a few 200M's get poached unintentionally but most of that firepower is done by weak CPU's that may take several hours to do what you and I can in a minute.

I myself am playing in the 400M range taking stuff to 68 bits. I'd do 66 but it's taxing on the server (and on me) to submit that volume of results.


EDIT: Note you can go to your account summary page to see your lifetime credit and results. It will show your 365-day pace and your lifetime totals.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

The general report shows the last 365 days. Maybe you worked a bit harder a year ago than you did recently.

No that's not it, a year ago I wasn't working on trial factoring, and I would have to have done more than the 1000+ exponents per day I can now churn out (in the low bit level range, low being 66-68'ish) for the yearly total to have dropped.

Only started gpu factoring 4 months so that can't be it.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by TheMawn

Yup. That's the 365-day list. It's a lot shorter and it's a more "current" version of who is doing what. More relevant.

P.S. be careful with the 200M range as it is being actively worked on. Excluding currently assigned exponents won't be all that helpful unless you grab work on a daily-ish basis. If you grab the very first non-assigned exponent in the list I guarantee someone else will grab it before you finish.

If you go even a few hundred thousand up from the leading edge, it's a bit safer. Overall, it wouldn't be a huge deal if a few 200M's get poached unintentionally but most of that firepower is done by weak CPU's that may take several hours to do what you and I can in a minute.

I myself am playing in the 400M range taking stuff to 68 bits. I'd do 66 but it's taxing on the server (and on me) to submit that volume of results.


EDIT: Note you can go to your account summary page to see your lifetime credit and results. It will show your 365-day pace and your lifetime totals.

I started at 230285000 as the first 6 digits are youngest daughters birthday

If I go 66-68 then I can test an exponent in the 230m range in less than 90 seconds, so it would seem unlikely & very unlucky for someone to have picked the same range, with similar hardware in terms of computing power...

As I said I have noticed this behavior 3 times before. Stuff in the 230m range, 400+ range and 800+ range.

The odds of someone happening to work on those exact same ranges at the same time are vanishingly small.

So there is more to it that, question stands, what is going on?

Of course the real answer is to fix primenet to allow gpu h/w to be a valid cpu id for check in purposes...

[LaurV]

Did you report anything (work done) between "this morning" and "just now" when you took the two snapshots? And if yes, how much? For me is clear that one of your LL or DC results was reported exactly between these two moments, but one year ago. So, your first report shows S+L (="some work done in the last 364 days and few hours" plus "one test done almost 365 days ago"), and the second report (I refer to your original post of the thread) shows N+S (="new work reported since morning", plus "some work done in the last 364 days and few hours", the same "S"). This is because the "L" is "too old" and dropped out from the list, and N is a bit smaller than L, or zero.

With a little bit of work you can find by yourself the incriminated "L".

There is no magic, and I don't think that anybody plays with your credit.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Did you report anything (work done) between "this morning" and "just now" when you took the two snapshots? And if yes, how much? For me is clear that one of your LL or DC results was reported exactly between these two moments, but one year ago. So, your first report shows S+L (="some work done in the last 364 days and few hours" plus "one test done almost 365 days ago"), and the second report (I refer to your original post of the thread) shows N+S (="new work reported since morning", plus "some work done in the last 364 days and few hours", the same "S"). This is because the "L" is "too old" and dropped out from the list, and N is a bit smaller than L, or zero.

With a little bit of work you can find by yourself the incriminated "L".

There is no magic, and I don't think that anybody plays with your credit.

So if that was the case why has the exponent count dropped by SEVENTEEN?

Plus I am only showing the TF credits...

[ixfd64]

I believe you would also lose credit if an LL result turns out to be incorrect. I'm not sure if that's still the case, though.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by ixfd64

I believe you would also lose credit if an LL result turns out to be incorrect. I'm not sure if that's still the case, though.

That's as may be, but I am only showing TF results, nothing else.

[TheMawn]

Get a screenshot of your account summary page with all the speedometers