Author Topic: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows (Read 26338 times)

nevica · « **on:** 29 Mar 2009, 05:52:33 am »

Hello,

BOINC has sent me a message that I dont have the app_info file for the optimized astropulse application.

I presume I will need to install this. My question is: Can I still run standard optimized SETI applications (setiathome_enhanced) as well as astropulse applications using the Optimized astropulse 5.03 for Windows application. Do I onlt need one app-info file which will take care of both types of data?

Thanks,

Nevica

Claggy · « **Reply #1 on:** 29 Mar 2009, 06:02:31 am »

Quote from: nevica on 29 Mar 2009, 05:52:33 am

Hello,

BOINC has sent me a message that I dont have the app_info file for the optimized astropulse application.

I presume I will need to install this. My question is: Can I still run standard optimized SETI applications (setiathome_enhanced) as well as astropulse applications using the Optimized astropulse 5.03 for Windows application. Do I onlt need one app-info file which will take care of both types of data?

Thanks,

Nevica

If you go to Arkayn's Site, he's done packages with AK_v8 apps and the Optimised Astropulse apps, just choose the correct one for your CPU / OS.

Multibeam and Astropulse Combined Packages

Claggy

nevica · « **Reply #2 on:** 29 Mar 2009, 06:29:45 am »

Hello Claggy,

Can these apps also be used with standard SETI WU's as well as Astropulse and Mulitibeam?

Nevica

Josef W. Segur · « **Reply #3 on:** 29 Mar 2009, 03:10:41 pm »

Quote from: nevica on 29 Mar 2009, 06:29:45 am

Hello Claggy,

Can these apps also be used with standard SETI WU's as well as Astropulse and Mulitibeam?

Nevica

Yes. "Multibeam" is a conventional synonym for "standard SETI WUs". Poorly chosen, since both types of work come from the same data provided by the multibeam recorder at Arecibo, but the project has chosen to name the splitters mb_splitter and ap_splitter.
Joe

_heinz · « **Reply #4 on:** 06 May 2009, 06:56:44 pm »

Error in AP 5.03 ?

today I saw the first 9 erros since I run ap 5.03 on my V8-Xeon
have a look at
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?userid=8071209&offset=0&show_names=0&state=5

heinz

Jason G · « **Reply #5 on:** 06 May 2009, 07:04:38 pm »

Can't see anything by that link Heinz ["No access"]. Is there some text in stderr that says "Blanking too much RFI?" .. if so, there's a stuck bit in some channel of some tapes apparently.

[Edit:] Yep, I found one in your tasks by going through your user info:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=1218244630

Quote

Error in ap_remove_radar.cpp: generate_envelope: num_ffts_performed < 100. Blanking too much RFI?

_heinz · « **Reply #6 on:** 06 May 2009, 08:00:24 pm »

Quote from: Jason G on 06 May 2009, 07:04:38 pm

Can't see anything by that link Heinz ["No access"]. Is there some text in stderr that says "Blanking too much RFI?" .. if so, there's a stuck bit in some channel of some tapes apparently.

[Edit:] Yep, I found one in your tasks by going through your user info:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=1218244630

Quote
Error in ap_remove_radar.cpp: generate_envelope: num_ffts_performed < 100. Blanking too much RFI?

Josef W. Segur · « **Reply #7 on:** 06 May 2009, 11:36:37 pm »

Quote from: Jason G on 06 May 2009, 07:04:38 pm

Can't see anything by that link Heinz ["No access"]. Is there some text in stderr that says "Blanking too much RFI?" .. if so, there's a stuck bit in some channel of some tapes apparently.

[Edit:] Yep, I found one in your tasks by going through your user info:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=1218244630

Quote
Error in ap_remove_radar.cpp: generate_envelope: num_ffts_performed < 100. Blanking too much RFI?

Quote from: _heinz on 06 May 2009, 08:00:24 pm

in all 9 cases is it this error:
Error in ap_remove_radar.cpp: generate_envelope: num_ffts_performed < 100. Blanking too much RFI?

too bad....if the tape has a lot of them... and the wu will be sent to the next user again
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438579544
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438102609
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438809547
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438938766
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438808229
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438585889
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438675872
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438558426
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438555961

heinz

My estimate is that there are at least 10000, on all B3_P1 channel WUs from 12 March through 20 March. It's a reappearance of a problem seen about a year ago in some SETI Beta Astropulse work, the data for that channel has a stuck bit. The reaction of 5.03 is to see that as a DC offset which means blanking is needed, and then since all the data is blanked it can't establish the envelope for data to do the blanking.

The good thing is this didn't happen with AP 5.00, which would have blanked all the data and then done full length processing antway. Some tests we did long ago proved that full blanking from 5.00 actually produces some false signals, those would have gone into the science database.

With 5.03 the cost to users is basically just whatever time it took to download the work, nobody is likely to get so many it has a serious impact on their daily quota. There will be 7 tasks sent for each WU, the 6th error returned will inhibit any beyond that time. So that's 7 tasks but doesn't cost much time nor have any bad science effect. Considering that normal Astropulse v5 work has been taking about 3.5 tasks sent to get a validated pair, the extra burden on the project servers isn't too bad either.

It would have been even better if it hadn't happened until 5.05 was released, that would put the same error line in stderr but produce a minimal result file and do a normal exit. There would be no signals in the output, the validator would compare the first two results received and see they were the same, and no reissues would be generated.

Obviously the best thing would have been locating and fixing the cause after the episode at Beta last year, but it wasn't happening on newly recorded data so I'm not surprised the cause couldn't be located.
Joe

_heinz · « **Reply #8 on:** 07 May 2009, 10:31:58 am »

Thanks Jason & Joe,
some more comming today:
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438441412
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438809808
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438515256

Josef W. Segur · « **Reply #9 on:** 07 May 2009, 01:47:59 pm »

Quote from: _heinz on 07 May 2009, 10:31:58 am

Thanks Jason & Joe,
some more comming today:
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438441412
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438809808
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438515256

Your post yesterday for http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438675872 (ap_21mr09aa_B3_P1_00358_20090501_27701.wu) extended the range we know has been affected by a day. Before that we knew about 12mr09 through 20mr09.

There are some more B3_P1 tasks on your host (not crunched yet) which have the problem. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=440203658 (ap_03ap09aa_B3_P1_00250_20090505_10103.wu_4) is the most interesting, as it extends our knowledge of how long the problem has lasted by almost 2 weeks.

There are some more 'tapes' which the ap_splitter processes haven't done yet which I think likely to have the same problem:

09mr09aa 50.20 GB
10mr09aa 50.20 GB
10mr09ab 50.20 GB
10mr09ac 50.20 GB

If you get any B3_P1 tasks from those, I'll be very interested in knowing whether thay do or do not have the problem. If we can identify when the problem started, that could help the project figure out a probable cause.

I'll be watching what few AP tasks I get and any reported in the project NC forum, but your host is getting a very good sample of the AP work being split.
Joe

_heinz · « **Reply #10 on:** 07 May 2009, 03:33:03 pm »

Hi Joe,
As I'm going through the WU's I found 13 of them (B3P1) I will post when they are done.
they are from
02ap09ab ap_02ap09ab_B3_P1_00170_20090504_15112.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=439903914
03ap09aa ap_03ap09aa_B3_P1_00250_20090505_10103.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=440203658

this wu show no error
07fe09aa ap_07fe09aa_B3_P1_00258_20090405_02593.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=430115086

13mr09ab ap_13mr09ab_B3_P1_00100_20090427_18772.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=437453704
14mr09aa ap_14mr09aa_B3_P1_00143_20090428_28964.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=437677134
14mr09ae ap_14mr09ae_B3_P1_00083_20090502_29770.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438809808
14mr09ae ap_14mr09ae_B3_P1_00030_20090502_29770.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438806928
14mr09ae ap_14mr09ae_B3_P1_00186_20090502_29770.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438813226
14mr09ae ap_14mr09ae_B3_P1_00000_20090502_29770.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438802784
15mr09ac ap_15mr09ac_B3_P1_00082_20090503_04267.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=439201056
15mr09ac ap_15mr09ac_B3_P1_00095_20090503_04267.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=439201094
15mr09ad ap_15mr09ad_B3_P1_00049_20090503_10075.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=439363429
20mr09ab ap_20mr09ab_B3_P1_00366_20090430_19532.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438335691
20mr09ac ap_20mr09ac_B3_P1_00229_20090501_12024.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438441412
20mr09ae ap_20mr09ae_B3_P1_00046_20090501_18046.wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=438559553

Richard Haselgrove · « **Reply #11 on:** 07 May 2009, 05:36:28 pm »

Extending the range quite a bit further:

WU 440549415: ap_05ap09ab_B3_P1_00131_20090506_17763.wu

Josef W. Segur · « **Reply #12 on:** 07 May 2009, 08:38:09 pm »

Quote from: Richard Haselgrove on 07 May 2009, 05:36:28 pm

Extending the range quite a bit further:

WU 440549415: ap_05ap09ab_B3_P1_00131_20090506_17763.wu

Thanks!

The splitters are now doing 06ap09, and may have done the two shortish 'tapes' from 07ap09 earlier today (wish I'd saved earlier done/not status). There aren't any later in April nor in May yet. WU creation is leading sent time by about 10.5 hours...
Joe

Richard Haselgrove · « **Reply #13 on:** 08 May 2009, 03:31:01 am »

Gap-filling:

WU 440049768: ap_02ap09ac_B3_P1_00078_20090505_16821.wu

Jason G · « **Reply #14 on:** 08 May 2009, 05:27:48 am »

A quick look through my list shows 15th, 20th & 21st march:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=1220223706
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=1217514719
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=1216553202

Author Topic: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows (Read 26338 times)

nevica

Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Claggy

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

nevica

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Josef W. Segur

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

_heinz

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Jason G

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

_heinz

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Josef W. Segur

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

_heinz

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Josef W. Segur

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

_heinz

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Richard Haselgrove

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Josef W. Segur

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Richard Haselgrove

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows

Jason G

Re: Optimized Astropulse 5.03 for Windows