kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4494
Merit: 1808
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
December 20, 2012, 12:45:04 PM |
|
Meanwhile ... Rather than typing numbers into my desktop calculator over and over ... I wrote this: http://tradebtc.net/potcalc.phpThe defaults (which you can change before you press 'Calculate' are a=0.8 Cap=1.5 Fee=3%) I'll change the defaults to whatever Graet sets them to ... when I notice they've changed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even in the event that an attacker gains more than 50% of the network's
computational power, only transactions sent by the attacker could be
reversed or double-spent. The network would not be destroyed.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
|
|
December 20, 2012, 12:55:06 PM |
|
Meanwhile ... Rather than typing numbers into my desktop calculator over and over ... I wrote this: http://tradebtc.net/potcalc.phpThe defaults (which you can change before you press 'Calculate' are a=0.8 Cap=1.5 Fee=3%) I'll change the defaults to whatever Graet sets them to ... when I notice they've changed I don't think you used the constant factor that corrects for share capping.
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4494
Merit: 1808
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
December 20, 2012, 01:17:56 PM |
|
Meanwhile ... Rather than typing numbers into my desktop calculator over and over ... I wrote this: http://tradebtc.net/potcalc.phpThe defaults (which you can change before you press 'Calculate' are a=0.8 Cap=1.5 Fee=3%) I'll change the defaults to whatever Graet sets them to ... when I notice they've changed I don't think you used the constant factor that corrects for share capping. Yeah I was applying it to share count I've changed it to cap the share value ... hopefully that's correct.
|
|
|
|
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
|
|
December 20, 2012, 01:52:56 PM |
|
Meanwhile ... Rather than typing numbers into my desktop calculator over and over ... I wrote this: http://tradebtc.net/potcalc.phpThe defaults (which you can change before you press 'Calculate' are a=0.8 Cap=1.5 Fee=3%) I'll change the defaults to whatever Graet sets them to ... when I notice they've changed I don't think you used the constant factor that corrects for share capping. Yeah I was applying it to share count I've changed it to cap the share value ... hopefully that's correct. I'm not sure we're on the same page, the formula for payout is [(1-a)/(1-a*wd^(1-a)*X^(a-1))]*(wd*B/D)*(min(X,sd)/wd)^a So letting a = 0.8, wd = 1, sd = 10, D = 3370181.7992778, X = 1.5D, B = 24.25 you should get 9.42407*10^-6 Rather than 9.08*10^-6 as in the site.
|
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
|
December 20, 2012, 01:55:30 PM |
|
Meanwhile ... Rather than typing numbers into my desktop calculator over and over ... I wrote this: http://tradebtc.net/potcalc.phpThe defaults (which you can change before you press 'Calculate' are a=0.8 Cap=1.5 Fee=3%) I'll change the defaults to whatever Graet sets them to ... when I notice they've changed I don't think you used the constant factor that corrects for share capping. Yeah I was applying it to share count I've changed it to cap the share value ... hopefully that's correct. I'm not sure we're on the same page, the formula for payout is [(1-a)/(1-a*wd^(1-a)*X^(a-1))]*(wd*B/D)*(min(X,sd)/wd)^a So letting a = 0.8, wd = 1, sd = 10, D = 3370181.7992778, X = 1.5D you should get 9.42407*10^-6 Rather than 9.08*10^-6 as in the site. He's including the 3% fee, which makes it closer. When are you applying the fee, kano?
|
|
|
|
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
|
|
December 20, 2012, 01:56:52 PM |
|
Meanwhile ... Rather than typing numbers into my desktop calculator over and over ... I wrote this: http://tradebtc.net/potcalc.phpThe defaults (which you can change before you press 'Calculate' are a=0.8 Cap=1.5 Fee=3%) I'll change the defaults to whatever Graet sets them to ... when I notice they've changed I don't think you used the constant factor that corrects for share capping. Yeah I was applying it to share count I've changed it to cap the share value ... hopefully that's correct. I'm not sure we're on the same page, the formula for payout is [(1-a)/(1-a*wd^(1-a)*X^(a-1))]*(wd*B/D)*(min(X,sd)/wd)^a So letting a = 0.8, wd = 1, sd = 10, D = 3370181.7992778, X = 1.5D you should get 9.42407*10^-6 Rather than 9.08*10^-6 as in the site. He's including the 3% fee, which makes it closer. When are you applying the fee, kano? Sorry, I included the fee too, ETA. The calculator simply uses the (1-a) factor rather than the [(1-a)/(1-a*wd^(1-a)*X^(a-1))] factor.
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4494
Merit: 1808
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
December 20, 2012, 02:04:56 PM |
|
heh well I guess I need to check what OzCoin is using at the moment - coz that's what matters (I'm not sure they've updated it yet to whatever the next version of the calculation is) I put the equations I'm using at the moment at the bottom of the web page (and the cap I'm using is simply a cap on 'Your Share Difficulty')
Edit: i.e. I'm using the OP post equation
|
|
|
|
crazyates
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 20, 2012, 02:40:57 PM |
|
Oh, I'm only using a lone BFL Single, but my varr diff is manually set to 2. Would that affect my earnings much? From what I can tell, a manually set work_difficulty makes for higher-paying high-diff shares, but fewer low-paying low-diff shares. Is this correct?
Sort of. You get paid the same as if the shares you submitted were only half the difficulty the are(since vardiff = work_difficulty =2), but multiplied by 2. Think of it like this: Reward per share = function(share_difficulty/work_difficulty) * work_difficulty So playing around with Kano's calculator (Thanks, btw! Just what I was looking for), it seems that manually setting work_difficulty to a higher value does increase the payout per share by a bit, at almost any share_difficulty. How is this offset? Just the fact that fewer shares are submitted? I understand your first formula (the on in the OP) pretty well, the second I'm having a harder time wading thru. At this point, I'm just trying to figure out practical applications.
|
|
|
|
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
|
|
December 20, 2012, 02:51:52 PM |
|
Oh, I'm only using a lone BFL Single, but my varr diff is manually set to 2. Would that affect my earnings much? From what I can tell, a manually set work_difficulty makes for higher-paying high-diff shares, but fewer low-paying low-diff shares. Is this correct?
Sort of. You get paid the same as if the shares you submitted were only half the difficulty the are(since vardiff = work_difficulty =2), but multiplied by 2. Think of it like this: Reward per share = function(share_difficulty/work_difficulty) * work_difficulty So playing around with Kano's calculator (Thanks, btw! Just what I was looking for), it seems that manually setting work_difficulty to a higher value does increase the payout per share by a bit, at almost any share_difficulty. How is this offset? Just the fact that fewer shares are submitted? Yes. By upping the work_difficulty, shares which are less than the new value will not be paid at all. This offsets the higher payment for the shares that are paid. I understand your first formula (the on in the OP) pretty well, the second I'm having a harder time wading thru. At this point, I'm just trying to figure out practical applications.
The second formula is what allows you to maintain the same average fee while capping the payout. It's more complicated, and that's part of the reason I'm not so enthusiastic about capping. heh well I guess I need to check what OzCoin is using at the moment - coz that's what matters (I'm not sure they've updated it yet to whatever the next version of the calculation is) I put the equations I'm using at the moment at the bottom of the web page (and the cap I'm using is simply a cap on 'Your Share Difficulty')
Edit: i.e. I'm using the OP post equation
Well if Graet is capping the shares but hasn't updated the formula, he's effectively taking 4% extra fee on top of the advertised fee. I hope this will be fixed soon.
|
|
|
|
GenTarkin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2450
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 20, 2012, 03:57:39 PM |
|
Well as it stands now, POT is horribly broken in my case. Im seeing negatives in the PPS difference column on almost every block(on the site stats) My overall is like 83% pps currently. So, the formula (hopefully new generations of it) will help fix this. Seems like my luck should be avg'n out to at least 100% ozcoin pps overall =P not a deficit of 17% =(
|
|
|
|
JWU42
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 20, 2012, 04:14:04 PM |
|
As expected unless you hit some 1M+ shares...
|
|
|
|
GenTarkin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2450
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 20, 2012, 05:02:18 PM |
|
As expected unless you hit some 1M+ shares...
LOL, 17% less than PPS? .. I dont think thats, "expected" .. "expected" would be hovering around 100% pps.. and deviate from that up n down .. if I can maintain a 117% pps for just as long a period, then I will retract my statement that the formula is broken...till that time, its broke =P
|
|
|
|
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
|
|
December 20, 2012, 05:13:21 PM |
|
As expected unless you hit some 1M+ shares...
LOL, 17% less than PPS? .. I dont think thats, "expected" .. "expected" would be hovering around 100% pps.. and deviate from that up n down .. if I can maintain a 117% pps for just as long a period, then I will retract my statement that the formula is broken...till that time, its broke =P The Pay-on-Target payout distribution is highly asymmetric. You don't get roughly equal numbers of above-average and below-average shares; rather, you get (with a = 0.8 ) 87% of the shares to be lower than average, then once in a while you hit the jackpot. Maybe you will soon get that big win that will bring you back to the black, maybe not. This of course does not rule out the possibility of an issue with the implementation.
|
|
|
|
Mysil2
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
|
|
December 20, 2012, 05:35:24 PM |
|
As expected unless you hit some 1M+ shares...
LOL, 17% less than PPS? .. I dont think thats, "expected" .. "expected" would be hovering around 100% pps.. and deviate from that up n down .. if I can maintain a 117% pps for just as long a period, then I will retract my statement that the formula is broken...till that time, its broke =P I can confirm the opposite. Running POT nearly 2 days with 4 Ghash/s now and I am at 18% above PPS rate. This is because I got an 3.18M share at diff 7. Great idea with this new payout method, definitely bringing some fun into mining again - And I hope my luck won't faint...
|
|
|
|
GenTarkin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2450
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 20, 2012, 07:13:56 PM |
|
I hear what you guys are saying... but to me, if I take the "avg share diff 1" column value and plug that into my spreadsheet w/ a wdiff of 1 and submitted shares value of "avg share diff 1"(it shows me the pot PPS based on my "avg share diff 1" then multiply by the value shown in "valid vardiff shares" column - that should be "ON AVERAGE" close to the cumulative paid amount per block row. Which, for nearly all my rows its about 20% short.
Meaning, the spreadsheet says, my calculated avg share diff 1 need to be a value of 8 to = ozco pps - fees. But according to stats page, its looking like avg share diff 1 needs to be at least around 10+ to = ozco pps - fees....
|
|
|
|
crazyates
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 20, 2012, 07:20:05 PM |
|
As expected unless you hit some 1M+ shares...
LOL, 17% less than PPS? .. I dont think thats, "expected" .. "expected" would be hovering around 100% pps.. and deviate from that up n down .. if I can maintain a 117% pps for just as long a period, then I will retract my statement that the formula is broken...till that time, its broke =P I can confirm the opposite. Running POT nearly 2 days with 4 Ghash/s now and I am at 18% above PPS rate. This is because I got an 3.18M share at diff 7. Great idea with this new payout method, definitely bringing some fun into mining again - And I hope my luck won't faint... Right now I'm at 12% under PPS, but a single share of 1million would bring me up to 45% over PPS. Damn you PoT for stringing me along!
|
|
|
|
Graet (OP)
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 20, 2012, 09:51:29 PM |
|
A few winners starting to appear Site stats are getting better and thanks to kano for the calculator - I can see it getting some lots of use We will be changing to the latest formula after Blaksmith finishes work today Hopefully soon we can get something works for both sides Please be aware that the nature of gambling is you can win or lose - this payout method is putting the luck back onto the miner - the shares you submit are what you are paid on, if your luck is bad you will lose, if good you will win. Thanks for the feedback and help, apologies for the delays (at least you didn't have to pre-order - joke) it is taking a bit longer than expected to get sorted, I feel we are getting closer, thanks to miners that have persevered during the trial Best wishes Graet
|
|
|
|
vapourminer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4326
Merit: 3536
what is this "brake pedal" you speak of?
|
|
December 20, 2012, 11:27:51 PM |
|
Im 2.4% under. seems ok to me. most shares are under but the over ones do a pretty good job of evening it out so far.. and it IS a gamble of sorts. Ill stick it out some more. makes coming home to see the stats fun again
|
|
|
|
Graet (OP)
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 21, 2012, 02:36:38 AM Last edit: December 21, 2012, 02:58:24 AM by Graet |
|
had my whip out, Blaksmith has worked up a sweat pounding code on his anvil new formula running round((1 - $a) / (1 - $a * pow($wd, (1 - $a)) * pow($X, ($a - 1))), 10) * ($wd * $B / $D) * pow(($sd / $wd), $a) a = 0.8 X = bitcoin_difficulty * 1.5 B = Currently set to 24.25 (take out 3% fee) D = bitcoin_difficulty wd = work from pool sd = work returned to pool from miner Lets see how this goes Good luck to anyone playing Graet One lucky blocksolver (the only POT block so far) 2012-12-21 01:26:19 share diff 19 work diff 5218578 paid 0.61359400 BTC congrats
|
|
|
|
-ck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 1633
Ruu \o/
|
|
December 21, 2012, 03:02:24 AM |
|
One lucky blocksolver (the only POT block so far) 2012-12-21 01:26:19 share diff 19 work diff 5218578 paid 0.61359400 BTC congrats W00t that one share was worth more than 86,000 PPS shares
|
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel 2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org -ck
|
|
|
|