Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: [CLOSED] Find inconsistency between angelshares.info and agsexplorer.com  (Read 1829 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bytemaster


This bounty is to find any persistent inconstancies between the master book of agsexplorer.com and angelshares.info that results in one site or the other making a fix to their calculation. 

I figure it doesn't hurt to double check their calculations.

This bounty is closed.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2014, 07:48:05 AM by bytemaster »
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline 029xue

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
The AGS info on below two sites are also identical and good to use:
http://joelooney.org/ags/
http://www.enccoin.com/
« Last Edit: January 14, 2014, 12:06:16 PM by 029xue »

Offline 029xue

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
I've an Excel in hand so I made a VBA function to compare the master book from agsexplorer.com and angelshares.info.

Agsexplorer.com has a API so it's easy to get all data, the data from angelshares.info are manual copied.

The result is a little astonished as no single result is identical in two sites!

To make the result meaningful, I changed the formula and considered the diff small than 10 (which is 0.00000001 AGS) as 'equal' because those diff may caused by different round trip in two sites.

However, even with that, the result is still not comfortable:

For BTC, only 30% can be thought as 'equal' and 56% have diff more than 0.00000001 AGS. The left 14% are orphan records, which means only exist in Agsexplorer.com and can't be found in angelshares.info.

For PTS, only 37% can be thought as 'equal' and 24% have diff more than 0.00000001 AGS. The left 39% are orphan records, which means only exist in Agsexplorer.com and can't be found in angelshares.info.

The picture is below and the compare sheet can be downloaded from here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2mCZ92eP_PeYy1hWldIcnJlZmM/edit?usp=sharing

Green:    diff < 0.00000001 AGS and thought as 'equal'
Yellow:    diff > 0.00000001 AGS and thought as 'suspicious"
Red:       orphan, record exist in agsexplorer.com but not in angelsshares.info




I don't know why the result is that but such a result is clearly not good... hope the site owner could explain that :)
« Last Edit: January 14, 2014, 03:08:36 PM by 029xue »

Offline 5chdn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
  • i wonder how many chars i can put in this field 50
    • View Profile
    • Votesapp
  • GitHub: 5chdn
The explaination is simple. Both sites seem to use another algorithm to map donations to addresses.

In the end the result is the same.

Offline bytemaster

I've an Excel in hand so I made a VBA function to compare the master book from agsexplorer.com and angelshares.info.

Agsexplorer.com has a API so it's easy to get all data, the data from angelshares.info are manual copied.

The result is a little astonished as no single result is identical in two sites!

To make the result meaningful, I changed the formula and considered the diff small than 10 (which is 0.00000001 AGS) as 'equal' because those diff may caused by different round trip in two sites.

However, even with that, the result is still not comfortable:

For BTC, only 30% can be thought as 'equal' and 56% have diff more than 0.00000001 AGS. The left 14% are orphan records, which means only exist in Agsexplorer.com and can't be found in angelshares.info.

For PTS, only 37% can be thought as 'equal' and 24% have diff more than 0.00000001 AGS. The left 39% are orphan records, which means only exist in Agsexplorer.com and can't be found in angelshares.info.

The picture is below and the compare sheet can be downloaded from here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2mCZ92eP_PeYy1hWldIcnJlZmM/edit?usp=sharing

Green:    diff < 0.00000001 AGS and thought as 'equal'
Yellow:    diff > 0.00000001 AGS and thought as 'suspicious"
Red:       orphan, record exist in agsexplorer.com but not in angelsshares.info




I don't know why the result is that but such a result is clearly not good... hope the site owner could explain that :)

I am giving you this bounty + an extra 1 PTS for the through research.  Please provide an address.    I expect the two teams to post here to resolve the differences in their accounting.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline bytemaster

The explaination is simple. Both sites seem to use another algorithm to map donations to addresses.

In the end the result is the same.

I would like to see the difference in their algorithms carefully documented and independently implemented.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline 029xue

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
I've an Excel in hand so I made a VBA function to compare the master book from agsexplorer.com and angelshares.info.

Agsexplorer.com has a API so it's easy to get all data, the data from angelshares.info are manual copied.

The result is a little astonished as no single result is identical in two sites!

To make the result meaningful, I changed the formula and considered the diff small than 10 (which is 0.00000001 AGS) as 'equal' because those diff may caused by different round trip in two sites.

However, even with that, the result is still not comfortable:

For BTC, only 30% can be thought as 'equal' and 56% have diff more than 0.00000001 AGS. The left 14% are orphan records, which means only exist in Agsexplorer.com and can't be found in angelshares.info.

For PTS, only 37% can be thought as 'equal' and 24% have diff more than 0.00000001 AGS. The left 39% are orphan records, which means only exist in Agsexplorer.com and can't be found in angelshares.info.

The picture is below and the compare sheet can be downloaded from here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2mCZ92eP_PeYy1hWldIcnJlZmM/edit?usp=sharing

Green:    diff < 0.00000001 AGS and thought as 'equal'
Yellow:    diff > 0.00000001 AGS and thought as 'suspicious"
Red:       orphan, record exist in agsexplorer.com but not in angelsshares.info

I don't know why the result is that but such a result is clearly not good... hope the site owner could explain that :)

I am giving you this bounty + an extra 1 PTS for the through research.  Please provide an address.    I expect the two teams to post here to resolve the differences in their accounting.

Thanks, please send the PTS to PryJ5DLovVj3Pck7sQWrwqia4gFSURL7xh :)

Offline 5chdn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
  • i wonder how many chars i can put in this field 50
    • View Profile
    • Votesapp
  • GitHub: 5chdn
this thread is misleading, bytemaster.

you issued AGS, and you should define how donations from multiple input addresses are handled.

of course i could take the time to write down detailled documentation on the algorithm, but to be honest, it would be better to announce how it will be.

after that me and the fluxxer can adjust their algorithms to fit the defined allocation procedure.

Offline bytemaster

this thread is misleading, bytemaster.

you issued AGS, and you should define how donations from multiple input addresses are handled.

of course i could take the time to write down detailled documentation on the algorithm, but to be honest, it would be better to announce how it will be.

after that me and the fluxxer can adjust their algorithms to fit the defined allocation procedure.

The algorithm I defined was that the first input address of every transaction should be the one allocated the AGS. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline 5chdn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
  • i wonder how many chars i can put in this field 50
    • View Profile
    • Votesapp
  • GitHub: 5chdn
this thread is misleading, bytemaster.

you issued AGS, and you should define how donations from multiple input addresses are handled.

of course i could take the time to write down detailled documentation on the algorithm, but to be honest, it would be better to announce how it will be.

after that me and the fluxxer can adjust their algorithms to fit the defined allocation procedure.

The algorithm I defined was that the first input address of every transaction should be the one allocated the AGS.

Define "first". Isnt that too random? What about the input address with highest input?

Offline bytemaster

this thread is misleading, bytemaster.

you issued AGS, and you should define how donations from multiple input addresses are handled.

of course i could take the time to write down detailled documentation on the algorithm, but to be honest, it would be better to announce how it will be.

after that me and the fluxxer can adjust their algorithms to fit the defined allocation procedure.

The algorithm I defined was that the first input address of every transaction should be the one allocated the AGS.

Define "first". Isnt that too random? What about the input address with highest input?

If all addresses belong to the same person then it doesn't matter which one is picked so long as it is deterministic.  First is deterministic, there may be two addresses with the same input amount.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline 5chdn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
  • i wonder how many chars i can put in this field 50
    • View Profile
    • Votesapp
  • GitHub: 5chdn
this thread is misleading, bytemaster.

you issued AGS, and you should define how donations from multiple input addresses are handled.

of course i could take the time to write down detailled documentation on the algorithm, but to be honest, it would be better to announce how it will be.

after that me and the fluxxer can adjust their algorithms to fit the defined allocation procedure.

The algorithm I defined was that the first input address of every transaction should be the one allocated the AGS.

Define "first". Isnt that too random? What about the input address with highest input?

If all addresses belong to the same person then it doesn't matter which one is picked so long as it is deterministic.  First is deterministic, there may be two addresses with the same input amount.

Okay, right, I will think about that. I got to rewrite the API to match this. I hope this wont cause confusion.

* donschoe pokes angelshares.info guys

The ags.info site must use the same algorithm too. How to ensure both sites pick the same first input address? Is the daemon always reporting the same input as "first"?

Offline bytemaster

this thread is misleading, bytemaster.

you issued AGS, and you should define how donations from multiple input addresses are handled.

of course i could take the time to write down detailled documentation on the algorithm, but to be honest, it would be better to announce how it will be.

after that me and the fluxxer can adjust their algorithms to fit the defined allocation procedure.

The algorithm I defined was that the first input address of every transaction should be the one allocated the AGS.

Define "first". Isnt that too random? What about the input address with highest input?

If all addresses belong to the same person then it doesn't matter which one is picked so long as it is deterministic.  First is deterministic, there may be two addresses with the same input amount.

Okay, right, I will think about that. I got to rewrite the API to match this. I hope this wont cause confusion.

* donschoe pokes angelshares.info guys

The ags.info site must use the same algorithm too. How to ensure both sites pick the same first input address? Is the daemon always reporting the same input as "first"?

It is deterministic in the blockchain.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline HackFisher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
    • View Profile
PTS donation amount on January 18 is different between http://www1.agsexplorer.com/  (about 2331 )and http://www.enccoin.com/ (about 3082) , and http://angelshares.info/ (about 1373)

Which one is correct? due to PTS network lag?

Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline bytemaster

PTS donation amount on January 18 is different between http://www1.agsexplorer.com/  (about 2331 )and http://www.enccoin.com/ (about 3082) , and http://angelshares.info/ (about 1373)

Which one is correct? due to PTS network lag?

If this inconsistency doesn't resolve itself within the next day then you will get 5 PTS
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

 

Google+