Advanced search

Message boards : News : validator has finished going over everything

Author Message
Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1690 - Posted: 22 Sep 2013, 23:18:52 UTC

The validator has finished going over everything, so the credit and accuracy stats should be updated. There's about 1300 video segments that still need another observation (because it detected a few that were validated improperly).

Right now your accuracy stats might be a little low, as accuracy for videos not yet validated is being averaged into the totals. I should have that fixed soon.

Profile Lemon
Send message
Joined: 10 May 13
Posts: 229
Combined Credit: 476,659
DNA@Home: 190,781
SubsetSum@Home: 225,957
Wildlife@Home: 59,921
Wildlife@Home Watched: 11,190,214s
Wildlife@Home Events: 0
Climate Tweets: 0
Images Observed: 0

        
Message 1691 - Posted: 22 Sep 2013, 23:22:22 UTC - in response to Message 1690.

Is the validator currently running? On server status it shows disabled, and videos I am currently watching do not seem to be getting validated.

Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1692 - Posted: 22 Sep 2013, 23:22:53 UTC - in response to Message 1691.
Last modified: 22 Sep 2013, 23:23:04 UTC

Is the validator currently running? On server status it shows disabled, and videos I am currently watching do not seem to be getting validated.


I'm periodically running it manually so I can watch things for awhile.

Profile Lemon
Send message
Joined: 10 May 13
Posts: 229
Combined Credit: 476,659
DNA@Home: 190,781
SubsetSum@Home: 225,957
Wildlife@Home: 59,921
Wildlife@Home Watched: 11,190,214s
Wildlife@Home Events: 0
Climate Tweets: 0
Images Observed: 0

        
Message 1693 - Posted: 23 Sep 2013, 2:14:38 UTC - in response to Message 1692.

I have noticed some videos where I have a rating (Valid/Invalid); they show up when I filter the Watched Videos page. But all viewers have accuracy of 0% and credit of 0. In some cases, there are already 5 observations, but not always. For instance, 150.622 - CH00_20120603_125609MN_CHILD0 only has 4 observations.

In every case I've seen, there should not yet be a Canonical based on your current validation algorithm.

Also, the Watched Videos page would allow me to Report the video, so it would appear that one observation is Canonical.

Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1695 - Posted: 23 Sep 2013, 5:11:50 UTC - in response to Message 1693.

I have noticed some videos where I have a rating (Valid/Invalid); they show up when I filter the Watched Videos page. But all viewers have accuracy of 0% and credit of 0. In some cases, there are already 5 observations, but not always. For instance, 150.622 - CH00_20120603_125609MN_CHILD0 only has 4 observations.

In every case I've seen, there should not yet be a Canonical based on your current validation algorithm.

Also, the Watched Videos page would allow me to Report the video, so it would appear that one observation is Canonical.


I didn't change the ratings (valid/invalid/canonical) of the observations, as the the validator updates them as it goes through.

These most likely haven't been re-validated because they require another observation.

Profile Lemon
Send message
Joined: 10 May 13
Posts: 229
Combined Credit: 476,659
DNA@Home: 190,781
SubsetSum@Home: 225,957
Wildlife@Home: 59,921
Wildlife@Home Watched: 11,190,214s
Wildlife@Home Events: 0
Climate Tweets: 0
Images Observed: 0

        
Message 1696 - Posted: 23 Sep 2013, 5:18:55 UTC - in response to Message 1695.

These most likely haven't been re-validated because they require another observation.

Yes, that is likely. But some of them already have 5 observations. In fact, N1030 - CH00_20110711_144505MN_CHILD56 already has 8 observations. Of those 8, 4 say Parent Absence = No and 4 say Yes. Therefore, there is no majority for that field.

With 8 observations, will it ever be looked at?

Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1703 - Posted: 23 Sep 2013, 17:46:59 UTC - in response to Message 1696.

These most likely haven't been re-validated because they require another observation.

Yes, that is likely. But some of them already have 5 observations. In fact, N1030 - CH00_20110711_144505MN_CHILD56 already has 8 observations. Of those 8, 4 say Parent Absence = No and 4 say Yes. Therefore, there is no majority for that field.

With 8 observations, will it ever be looked at?


If the validator hits something with 5+ observations and can't get a canonical one, then it gets marked NO_CONSENSUS, and the observations will be marked INCONCLUSIVE.

And you did find a bug in the validator. It was looking at these, and setting the overall markings for that video segment to NO_CONSENSUS, but it wasn't updating the observations. And there are about 110 video segments in the database that fall into this category. Working on fixing that right now.

Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1704 - Posted: 23 Sep 2013, 18:14:20 UTC - in response to Message 1703.

These should now be awarded partial credit and partial accuracy.

I think I'm also going to have these be automatically flagged for expert observation.

Profile STE\/E
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 5 Apr 13
Posts: 416
Combined Credit: 29,783,819
DNA@Home: 2,634,206
SubsetSum@Home: 735,231
Wildlife@Home: 26,414,382
Wildlife@Home Watched: 53,380,530s
Wildlife@Home Events: 9,349
Climate Tweets: 0
Images Observed: 0

          
Message 1711 - Posted: 24 Sep 2013, 5:59:46 UTC

I've noticed my Accuracy Rating Drops as my Pending Validation Videos Rises, I think it makes it a bit confusing when it does this. It makes me wonder if I'm marking the Video's wrong & I keep checking my Invalid Video's to see if there's new ones but there isn't ...

Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1712 - Posted: 24 Sep 2013, 14:25:26 UTC - in response to Message 1711.

I've noticed my Accuracy Rating Drops as my Pending Validation Videos Rises, I think it makes it a bit confusing when it does this. It makes me wonder if I'm marking the Video's wrong & I keep checking my Invalid Video's to see if there's new ones but there isn't ...


Yeah, this is because of the issue I said before -- accuracy is currently being calculated as (total awarded accuracy / total observations); so observations pending validation will lower this. Should have it fixed today.

Profile DoctorNow
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 31 Jan 12
Posts: 328
Combined Credit: 2,333,912
DNA@Home: 94,617
SubsetSum@Home: 162,940
Wildlife@Home: 2,076,355
Wildlife@Home Watched: 1,977,485s
Wildlife@Home Events: 589
Climate Tweets: 128
Images Observed: 2,678

              
Message 1715 - Posted: 24 Sep 2013, 16:26:58 UTC - in response to Message 1712.

accuracy is currently being calculated as (total awarded accuracy / total observations); so observations pending validation will lower this. Should have it fixed today.

Does that mean the values are going back to the old ones? I noticed the accuracy rising everywhere on the watching pages but my account still shows the old value.
____________
Wildlife & SubsetSum Badges-creator ;-)
Mod/Guru @ the german team BOINC@Heidelberg
My BOINC-Stats / My Badges

Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1720 - Posted: 24 Sep 2013, 16:47:52 UTC - in response to Message 1715.

accuracy is currently being calculated as (total awarded accuracy / total observations); so observations pending validation will lower this. Should have it fixed today.

Does that mean the values are going back to the old ones? I noticed the accuracy rising everywhere on the watching pages but my account still shows the old value.


Some pages (like the top lists and your profile/preferences) use cached values for credit/accuracy, which get updated every few minutes. These will always lag behind the values that you see in the forums (which are updated from their current value).

Profile DoctorNow
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 31 Jan 12
Posts: 328
Combined Credit: 2,333,912
DNA@Home: 94,617
SubsetSum@Home: 162,940
Wildlife@Home: 2,076,355
Wildlife@Home Watched: 1,977,485s
Wildlife@Home Events: 589
Climate Tweets: 128
Images Observed: 2,678

              
Message 1721 - Posted: 24 Sep 2013, 16:52:54 UTC - in response to Message 1720.

That's not really what I meant. My account still does show the accuracy value before the revalidation started...
____________
Wildlife & SubsetSum Badges-creator ;-)
Mod/Guru @ the german team BOINC@Heidelberg
My BOINC-Stats / My Badges

Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1722 - Posted: 24 Sep 2013, 16:54:21 UTC - in response to Message 1720.

accuracy is currently being calculated as (total awarded accuracy / total observations); so observations pending validation will lower this. Should have it fixed today.

Does that mean the values are going back to the old ones? I noticed the accuracy rising everywhere on the watching pages but my account still shows the old value.


Some pages (like the top lists and your profile/preferences) use cached values for credit/accuracy, which get updated every few minutes. These will always lag behind the values that you see in the forums (which are updated from their current value).


Oh! I misunderstood. I can fix that.

Travis Desell
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 12
Posts: 1813
Combined Credit: 23,514,257
DNA@Home: 293,563
SubsetSum@Home: 349,212
Wildlife@Home: 22,871,482
Wildlife@Home Watched: 212,926s
Wildlife@Home Events: 51
Climate Tweets: 21
Images Observed: 774

              
Message 1724 - Posted: 24 Sep 2013, 17:02:46 UTC - in response to Message 1721.

That's not really what I meant. My account still does show the accuracy value before the revalidation started...


Should be fixed now.


Post to thread

Message boards : News : validator has finished going over everything