I've turned on adaptive validation, so let me know if you're having any validation issues. What's going to happen now is that all results that would improve our searches are still always validated. However, those that won't improve our searches will be validated based on your error rate. The more bad results you return the more frequently your workunits will require validation.

---

However, those that won't improve our searches will be validated based on your error rate.

Not at all familiar with the science here but I just gotta ask:

If you know beforehand that a WU will not improve your search, why send it to a client?

Well,
I'm not a project scientist and I originally asked the question and after thinking about it only the computer at the science lab would be able to pick up on that because humans just can't handle thousands of results manually. That would cause a huge headache :)

Dr. Ronald C. Spencer

Emeritus Astronomer: The American Astronomical Society
Member: The Division for Planetary Sciences of the AAS
Member: The American Association of Variable Star Observers
Member: The Astronomical society of the Pacific
Member: The planetary Society

I have concluded that Travis is doing the best he can.

However, those that won't improve our searches will be validated based on your error rate.

Not at all familiar with the science here but I just gotta ask:

If you know beforehand that a WU will not improve your search, why send it to a client?

We don't know beforehand. That's why we wait for the result to come back and see if the fitness that you calculated is better than the fitness of the members of our search population. If it will improve the search, we validate it first. If it won't, then we validate it based on your error rate.

---

We don't know beforehand. That's why we wait for the result to come back and see if the fitness that you calculated is better than the fitness of the members of our search population. If it will improve the search, we validate it first. If it won't, then we validate it based on your error rate.

Ok. So all WUs have "minimum quorum" set to 1. Then you decide to send it out again after getting the result.
Thought maybe you had some magic way of setting minimum quorum to 1 or 2 before sending a WU to the first client.

Ok. So all WUs have "minimum quorum" set to 1. Then you decide to send it out again after getting the result.

It has done this for some time now.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

Ok. So all WUs have "minimum quorum" set to 1. Then you decide to send it out again after getting the result.

It has done this for some time now.

Yeah, that's how it works.

---

Yeah, that's how it works.

When it is working:

separation_assimilator milkyway Not Running

Workunits waiting for validation 41,370