[1200 TH] EMC: 0 Fee DGM. Anonymous PPS. US & EU servers. No Registration!

[Inaba]

Let me get this straight: "(+9.24%)" under "Prop diff." means payout is 9% greater compared to what the payout would have been using proportional method? If so, a positive amount means "good". In the "luck" column, positive amounts mean "bad".

So, it would be my suggestion you should color this column accordingly (orange for "bad", green for "good" - this has to be the miners view, of course )

That's correct, you received 9.24% more than you would have under Proportional.  

That's a fine idea with the colors and I've added that to the block display!

One of the problems with the luck column is that there is no upward bound on "bad" luck, whereas there is a negative bound of 1% (or 0% if it takes exactly one share to find a block) - you can only have a -99% luck factor, but you can have a theoretically infinite + luck factor.  So the color visualization is kind of misleading... if anyone has any ideas on how to improve the luck factor display, I'm all ears.

[1713926163]

1713926163

[1713926163]

1713926163

[1713926163]

1713926163

[Druas]

One of the problems with the luck column is that there is no upward bound on "bad" luck, whereas there is a negative bound of 1% (or 0% if it takes exactly one share to find a block) - you can only have a -99% luck factor, but you can have a theoretically infinite + luck factor.  So the color visualization is kind of misleading... if anyone has any ideas on how to improve the luck factor display, I'm all ears.

You could make it so that every +50% or +100% is a new darker shade of red. Then at some point (maybe like +400%) the dark red just turns into a small nuclear explosion.

[BadPenny]

The Shares per block Graph seems to have flipped.

[Inaba]

Ah... yeah they seem to be backwards now huh.  I limited the graphs to the last 100 blocks, since they were getting pretty crowded.  I didn't consider that it would start graphing them from the other way, doh.  I need to fix the labels.

[Math Man]

I got an email notification that we solved block 153862 this morning.  It's not showing up in the block stats though. 

[Inaba]

Yeah, it was a mistake.  We solved 153863 a bit earlier and the system thought we solved 153862 for some reason later.  I changed the way new blocks are discovered to prevent that from happening in the future.  I thought I had it the proper unique keys set on the DB, but apparently I didn't have it set to the TXID like it should have been and it was keying off of the block number.  Doh.

[likuidxd]

It's time to try a new pool. Can I still get in on merged mining here?

[Inaba]

Sure thing, come on in!  We would be glad to have you!

[Meni Rosenfeld]

One of the problems with the luck column is that there is no upward bound on "bad" luck, whereas there is a negative bound of 1% (or 0% if it takes exactly one share to find a block) - you can only have a -99% luck factor, but you can have a theoretically infinite + luck factor.  So the color visualization is kind of misleading... if anyone has any ideas on how to improve the luck factor display, I'm all ears.

Depends on what exactly you want to achieve with the luck factor display, but one obvious way to have a balanced view is to use percentiles. If the round length is N and the difficulty is D, then exp(-N/D) is the (opposite of the) percentile, which is uniformly distributed from 0% to 100% - higher is better and 50% is in some sense average luck (unlike the current luck factor which is green more often than red). Then you can color-code that, maybe even with a continuous gradation from red to green.

[Inaba]

So I made some adjustments as you mentioned, Meni... I'm not sure that clears up any confusion, just seems to be trading it for different confusion.

So we have a 95% block, which is good luck, but a 13% block which is bad luck.  Seems like we should still have some sort of positive/negative list as to if we are under or over expected shares (difficulty). 

[organofcorti]

I'm not sure this is any better, but I've used -log(N/D) in the past. This will give you a number between about +/- 2.5 for most rounds, but it overemphasises lucky rounds.

[Druas]

So I made some adjustments as you mentioned, Meni... I'm not sure that clears up any confusion, just seems to be trading it for different confusion.

So we have a 95% block, which is good luck, but a 13% block which is bad luck.  Seems like we should still have some sort of positive/negative list as to if we are under or over expected shares (difficulty). 

I agree, but I do like the varying shades of green/red.

[Math Man]

The shades of red and blue are neat.

The luck column now cuts off some of the leading digits though.  I checked in both Chrome and IE.  I think you need to increase the luck column width.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

So I made some adjustments as you mentioned, Meni... I'm not sure that clears up any confusion, just seems to be trading it for different confusion.

So we have a 95% block, which is good luck, but a 13% block which is bad luck.  Seems like we should still have some sort of positive/negative list as to if we are under or over expected shares (difficulty). 

I don't think it's that important to know if it's above/below difficulty. "Luck" gives the connotation of making comparisons in the percentile space. Then average luck is 69.3% of the difficulty, which is the 50% percentile (median). Above 50% should be green, below should be red (currently it looks like the midpoint for colors is about 40%).

Anyway, I think it will look better if all numbers in the column will be in the format ##.##%, even if it has leading or trailing 0's.

[mmortal03]

Hey Catfish, I'll bite.  I'd like to try out your setup.

mmortal03 - Hmm, yeah I can up the default. So you're thinking like 20 NMC or something?  What about when we reach parity with BTC difficulty though?

Sorry, I didn't see your post.  What you could probably do is just make it a ratio based on whatever the exchange rate is, and then round it off to a whole number, that is, if you do have the ability in your code to make it vary with the exchange rate.

[Inaba]

So I made some adjustments as you mentioned, Meni... I'm not sure that clears up any confusion, just seems to be trading it for different confusion.

So we have a 95% block, which is good luck, but a 13% block which is bad luck.  Seems like we should still have some sort of positive/negative list as to if we are under or over expected shares (difficulty).  

I don't think it's that important to know if it's above/below difficulty. "Luck" gives the connotation of making comparisons in the percentile space. Then average luck is 69.3% of the difficulty, which is the 50% percentile (median). Above 50% should be green, below should be red (currently it looks like the midpoint for colors is about 40%).

Anyway, I think it will look better if all numbers in the column will be in the format ##.##%, even if it has leading or trailing 0's.

The problem I have with the original method, as I stated, was that there was no upward bound on bad luck since it can't be counter balanced by good luck (which is bound to 0 or 1).  

However, with the percentile, the bad luck gets compressed at the low end and again has no meaningful bound (bad luck of .46% and .11% - a huge number of shares, but a virtually meaningless difference percent wise in human terms.  .46% and .11% don't express how bad that luck really is in a way that's more visceral than the straight math.)

Maybe there's no good way to express it mathematically and it just needs an arbitrary label:

0 - 20% of shares D -> Happy face with a lollipop
21% - 60% of shares D -> Happy face
61% - 100% of shares D -> Neutral face
100% - 120% of shares D -> Sad face
120% - 200% of shares D -> Crying face
>200% of shares D -> Dead stick figure

Just a thought.

Anyway - what does everyone else think?  Purely mathematic numbers that have a real meaning behind them or arbitrary "general feel" description of the luck?

[Meni Rosenfeld]

Maybe there's no good way to express it mathematically and it just needs an arbitrary label:

I think the question of what number to display is completely distinct from how to visualize it. For the number you can have (N/D-1) as it was before, or exp(-N/D) as it is now, or ln(N/D) as organ suggested. Each has its own pros and cons with respect to the message you want to deliver.

And then you can choose how each possibility should be visualized. If for example you feel that anything above 400% difficulty (which happens for 1.83% of blocks) is an Eternally Damned Cursed Block from Azazel, give it an icon and color to match.

[Inaba]

The shades of red and blue are neat.

The luck column now cuts off some of the leading digits though.  I checked in both Chrome and IE.  I think you need to increase the luck column width.

Sorry, meant to respond to this.  Can you show a screenshot of what you're talking about?  I don't see it on my browsers (three or four different machines, too). 

I think the question of what number to display is completely distinct from how to visualize it. For the number you can have (N/D-1) as it was before, or exp(-N/D) as it is now, or ln(N/D) as organ suggested. Each has its own pros and cons with respect to the message you want to deliver.

Yes, I agree, that is actually the question I have been trying to articulate and failing.   So I would say exp(-N/D) is adequate for that if defined boundaries for the visualization are made good.

[Inaba]

Cash out is coming.  Beware!

But seriously... I'm in the final stages of testing the new cash out code (thanks, once again, to Meni for the idea and math help).  Once I verify that it processes future paid blocks properly, which should be in about another 12 blocks, I will make it live.

The cash out option will allow you to be paid immediately for all of your BTC, including your unconfirmed BTC and unrealized score BTC.  Because there is substantial risk involved with paying out unconfirmed and unrealized BTC, there is a 10% fee tacked onto the unconfirmed and unrealized cashout.  You will still be paid for your confirmed BTC without a fee.

What this means is if you wish to be paid NOW for all of your work, you can use this feature, less a 10% fee on unconfirmed blocks and be paid.  Your score will be reset and it will be as if you just started mining on the pool if you continue to mine.  The risk for the pool is that if we have a block invalidated, we are absorbing your payout.  If a block runs exceptionally long, your unrealized payout would normally be less than you were actually paid out for, so I have to cover that for the pool as well.  This is why there is a 10% fee on those two portions of your payout. 

The cash out option is not really intended to be used regularly, but only if you, for what ever reason, need to be paid now.

It currently does not pay out NMC pending (or confirmed) - I would recommend you convert NMC to BTC before doing that, or take your NMC payout.  I will be adding cash out for NMC in the near future, but I wanted to make sure this was working properly first.

If you have any questions, comments or suggestions, please let me know!

[Inaba]

I've made the cash out option live, at least for a limited test run.  Feel free to make use of it as you see fit.