Understanding tuning results

[Boris 'pi' Piwinger]

Boris 'pi' Piwinger wrote:

>>> > 06/05 14:59:51 1      0.475 fpos...0 at cutoff 0.503000, run0...  62  run1... 66  run2... 78  206
>>> > 06/05 15:13:54 3.2e-1 0.475 fpos...0 at cutoff 0.503000, run0...  62  run1... 66  run2... 78  206
>>> > 06/05 15:28:38 1e-1   0.475 fpos...0 at cutoff 0.503000, run0...  62  run1... 66  run2... 78  206
>>> > 06/05 15:43:10 3.2e-2 0.475 fpos...0 at cutoff 0.503000, run0...  62  run1... 66  run2... 78  206
>>> > 06/05 15:55:58 1e-2   0.475 fpos...0 at cutoff 0.503000, run0...  62  run1... 66  run2... 78  206
>>>
>>>That suggests that robs is without any meaning. I doubt it.
>>>There is something really broken.
>> 
>> I beg to differ.  The results say that the robs value isn't a significant 
>> contributor to the result.  Based on other tests, I'd suggest using 1e-2 
>> for the value.
> 
> So with the new version .13.6.2 I did a new run:
> 
>> 06/06 14:00:17 1      0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.978100, run0.. 160  run1.. 160  run2.. 143  463
>> 06/06 14:13:06 3.2e-1 0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.978100, run0.. 160  run1.. 160  run2.. 143  463
>> 06/06 14:26:57 1e-1   0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.978100, run0.. 160  run1.. 160  run2.. 143  463
>> 06/06 14:40:36 3.2e-2 0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.978100, run0.. 160  run1.. 160  run2.. 143  463
>> 06/06 14:55:05 1e-2   0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.978100, run0.. 160  run1.. 160  run2.. 143  463
> 
> That is strange. Again no significance of robs.

Next one:

> 06/12 12:37:43 1      0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.797000, run0.. 132  run1.. 106  run2.. 120  358
> 06/12 12:51:55 3.2e-1 0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.797000, run0.. 132  run1.. 106  run2.. 120  358
> 06/12 13:06:23 1e-1   0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.797000, run0.. 132  run1.. 106  run2.. 120  358
> 06/12 13:20:34 3.2e-2 0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.797000, run0.. 132  run1.. 106  run2.. 120  358
> 06/12 13:35:24 1e-2   0.450 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.797000, run0.. 132  run1.. 106  run2.. 120  358
> 06/12 12:36:54 1      0.425 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.946100, run0.. 188  run1.. 165  run2.. 173  526
> 06/12 12:51:07 3.2e-1 0.425 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.946100, run0.. 188  run1.. 165  run2.. 173  526
> 06/12 13:05:36 1e-1   0.425 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.946100, run0.. 188  run1.. 165  run2.. 173  526
> 06/12 13:19:46 3.2e-2 0.425 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.946100, run0.. 188  run1.. 165  run2.. 173  526
> 06/12 13:34:41 1e-2   0.425 fpos.. 0 at cutoff 0.946100, run0.. 188  run1.. 165  run2.. 173  526

Again, robs is not siginificant at all. That cannot be
correct. Is anybody else seeing that?

pi