Please Read!
http://www.stephenbrooks.org/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=724606111&f=144606111&m=2326000523
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The DPC have made a collection of their best results. This database is as of now open to the public!
Visit http://stephan202.qik.nl/ to download the results and add your own.
Note! Some people on this forum believe that this method is not good for the scientific side of the project! Please read about the pro's and con's and make a decision for your own!
---
Dutch Power Cow.
MOOH!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.stephenbrooks.org/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=724606111&f=144606111&m=9296036423
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by [DPC]Stephan202:
Currently the yields in the DPC TopNNN file are also climbing _very_ slow. Highest at this moment is 13.374989.
Edit: a result with a yield of 13.525438 has just been uploaded .
---
Dutch Power Cow.
MOOH!
[This message was edited by [DPC]Stephan202 on 2003-May-20 at 19:41.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check in your results.dat to see if the new high score is a single calculation or a "#runs=nn" multiple run calculation. I was finding that the only way I was getting "better" yields was with single calculations, and if you do enough of these, you eventually get "lucky" because of the limited number of particles simulated. But the design is not necessarily "good", and is probably no better than the lower scored ones.
Personally, I only regard the results of my multiple calculations as valid, and I am using 7 and 9 repeats depending on the speed of my machines.
Based on ignoring the results of single calculations, I am "stuck", and not seeing any valid new high scores.
I think px3 has a good idea, and that is to start again, and hope that you don't find the same design. We have time on our side, so even if it takes several weeks to get back up to high scores, it doesn't matter.
And I think that this time, I will keep my two principal machines from seeing each other's results.dat in the hope that they end up in different "places".
My personal goal is create the highest yield, and not the highest number of particles processed. And I want that yield to be valid and repeatable. Science rules!
~~~~~~~~~
Thoughts? Perhaps we can jointly work in this as well. It appears that perhaps the single runs = rogue. While the multiple run (such as 5) are valid and true. Either way stephen is incredibly pleased that the max efficiency *we think* is being achieved in a few short weeks per each test..
The only problem lies in the fact that w/ all the top results.txt sharing the whole projects takes 1 path...what if there is ANOTHER/better one? That is the current question that is brewing (and is one of the main reasons DPC released their loader)...