Thank you,

Ingleside & Benher,

for giving this explanation.
Now I understand it.

---

> Ingleside is correct,
>
> Code for granting hasn't changed recently.
>
> Has allways been:
> A. remove highest claimed
> B. remove lowest
> C. add up remainder of claims (however many that may be).
> D. Divide by count of claims in C (average).
>
> Seti had allways been 3 results per WU, so 3-high-low = 1, and average of
> middle score = middle/1 .
>
> Backlog caused a few of the 4 result WUs to all be returned and be in database
> before validation...and for those, it was average of middle two.
>
> This is from looking at the server source code.
>
This is correct with one addendum. If the quorum is 2 or less grant the lowest claim of valid results.

[edit] Missed that ingleside had already pointed this out. Please ingnore this redundant post.

---

BOINC WIKI

BOINCing since 2002/12/8

> Thank you,
>
> Ingleside & Benher,
>
> for giving this explanation.
> Now I understand it.
>
Me too, seems I was wrong on the "no formulas".

---

> > > NO formula, NO division is done with the credits! Straight numbers
> here,
> > 3
> > > results, all within statistical limits, the middle number is what
> > everyone
> > > gets!
> > > Computer A requests 34.75, Computer B 35.98, Computer C 43.22, ALL
> users
> > are
> > > granted 35.98 credits!
> > >
> > But then how is this one figured if no divisions are done?
> > http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=7401955
> >
> > 24.17
> > 28.51
> > 26.49
> > 28.77
> >
> > granted = 27.50
> >
> > That looks a lot like (28.51 + 26.49)/2
> >
>
>
> I agree, it does look like the average of the top/bottom of the first 3
> results
> It's the first result I've seen like this, I'd love an explanation from one of
> the SETI crew
>
Easy. All 4 came beck before the validator got a crack at it. Therefore the middle two were averaged.

---

BOINC WIKI