Index  | Recent Threads  | Unanswered Threads  | Who's Active  | Guidelines  | Search
 

Quick Go »
No member browsing this thread
Thread Status: Active
Total posts in this thread: 69
Posts: 69   Pages: 7   [ Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next Page ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread
Author
Previous Thread This topic has been viewed 14524 times and has 68 replies Next Thread
KLiK
Master Cruncher
Croatia
Joined: Nov 13, 2006
Post Count: 3108
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

Please know that we don't intentionally withhold information from the volunteers (unless we have to, e.g. before a paper is officially published). But sometimes, we just don't have enough information to accurately predict project end dates. The end date is determined by a range of factors, some are project-specific and others are not so easy to predict. In the past, when we've had a good idea of the end date, we've provided a heads up to the volunteers that the project is ending soon. But that's not always possible. We also acknowledge that the progress bars have been more misleading than helpful (due to our lack of ability to consistently and accurately predict end dates) and we are looking to replace them - although I don't anticipate that we'll be able to do so before Q3 of this year.

In the case of Smash Childhood Cancer, based on the available work and the amount of computing time the project is currently receiving, the project could end in a few weeks' time. But the researchers are considering adding more targets to screen drug candidates against. Whether those additional targets will be available before the current supply runs out, or we have to pause the project until additional targets are available, is still to be determined.

For the Clean Energy Project, the situation was very different. The project had been paused for some time, in anticipation of new types of work units to start running through World Community Grid. We and the Harvard team had spent some time testing and tweaking those types of work units, to no avail. In determining next steps, our primary question to the researchers is always "What would be most valuable to your research?". In this case, the Harvard team acknowledged that the current research application they were using on World Community Grid was imposing too many constraints on their current work and that a more efficient way of leveraging the generous amount of computing power World Community Grid volunteers provide, would be to switch to a new research application. That's how the decision was made to close phase 2 of the Clean Energy Project. And as soon as that decision was made, we announced it to the volunteers and closed down the project (since there was no work running for the project anyway). We have begun discussing next steps with Harvard and are evaluating a couple of different options in terms of research applications and project scope going forward. i.e. We aim to ensure that the researchers are getting the most value out of your donated computing power, even if it means changing project direction.

For the wider point about communications, I'd like to point out a few things. We meet with each research team once a month. During those meetings, we discuss everything from availability of work, analysis of the results, validity of the data, any papers they're working on, any conferences they're attending, any collaborations they're forming, any funding grants they're applying for, any changes in their team, any challenges they're facing, etc. And then, every few months, we ask them to draft an update to articulate that information (or at least whichever part of it they can talk about publicly), even if the update is no more than a few lines long. i.e. We agree that it's important to sustain a reasonable cadence of communications and work with the researchers closely to try to do so.

In short, please don't interpret these incidents as our lack of appreciation for the valuable contribution our members make. When we have information to share, we strive to do so.

Finally, as others have already noted, there is no World Community Grid office, we all work remotely.

Guys, we do agree that you're not some government employee doing almost anything. So sending those mail 30 days before the project ECD is not meant to be a man-work (women, please don't offended).

Suggestion was made for developing a mail-delivery automated system that would check the ECD (if it's less than 30 days on BOINC server) & then send out the "30 days warning" to all participants on that project over mail. Like we have "Weekly notices" from you, we might also get some "Warning mails for 30 days ECD" for some projects...

& yes, I agree that % are not very good. So I also suggested you reveal the "Month & Year of ECD" for all projects, while projects on ECD can have even "Date, Month & Year of ECD" written.
It's not that hard to implement that (as you have "Month & Year of ECD" for 30 days before ending of the project), it will be more transparent to all people who participate in the project & it will give people clearer picture as what's happening. % then can stay, as the ECD will be more & more accurate as the % go higher to the end of the project.
wink
----------------------------------------
oldies:UDgrid.org & PS3 Life@home


non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia
[Apr 5, 2017 9:17:53 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

@Juan,

Would it be possible to get a paragraph synopsis (meeting minutes) of the monthly meeting with the researchers. Summarizing the items you noted above. Where are we with the AsyncRE process for example. Sorry, but unlike others, I don't hold WCG blameless. WCG belongs to IBM, not the researchers. Communication relative to WCG should come primarily from the WCG staff and not the researchers. In addition to individual project metrics (Work available, new targets etc) there are items related to the infrastructure that never seemed to be discussed like upload/download problems, slowness on the Web Server, API issues etc. These just seem to be ignored. What excuse is there for not communicating about those issues?
[Apr 5, 2017 1:44:09 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
NixChix
Veteran Cruncher
United States
Joined: Apr 29, 2007
Post Count: 1187
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

If there is a monthly meeting (teleconference I presume), please ensure that the estimate of remaining work, especially when there is less than 2 months remaining, is on the agenda. Maybe the researchers aren't paying close attention to that matter and don't realize that the flow will soon be interrupted and they need to get moving on synthesizing more batches for us grunts to grind away at. I hope I am not suggesting something that isn't already being done, and if it is we could have already been told that "Yes the known work will run out around X, but the researchers will be synthesizing Y more batches which should last until Z." No need to wait for the researchers to post anything.

It really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things if a project temporarily runs out of work, and we are all here to support scientific research. But please give us some consideration and information before we have to be begging for it.

I will be so bold to suggest that WCG *is* withholding information since these things apparently are known, but no postings are made to that effect. What has just happened with Clean Energy after a year-long blackout of information is a perfect example. After it was suddenly (to us volunteers) closed down we are told the secret tale of the past year. MCM and HSTB are yet more examples of known information not being posted. This volunteer has been "burned" by mis-information in the past and would like for WCG to improve.

Cheers coffee
----------------------------------------

[Apr 5, 2017 2:53:18 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
jhindo
Former World Community Grid Admin
Joined: Aug 25, 2009
Post Count: 250
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

Thanks everyone for your comments and suggestions about the kinds of communications you'd like to see from us and/or the researchers. We'll discuss and figure out how we might tweak our processes to address these concerns.

KLiK, your suggestion of sending out automated email (or other) notifications 30 days prior to the projected end date would be just as misleading as the current progress bars. When I mentioned replacing the progress bars, I wasn't just referring to the confusion that the % complete was causing, but also our lack of ability to accurately predict the end date itself. If we can't always estimate an end date accurately, then sending a notification based on that date would only add legitimacy to something we don't always have confidence in. What the progress bars will likely be replaced with is a higher level idea of how far along the project is at. And any more granular information (such as a projected end date, whenever known), would be provided elsewhere.
[Apr 5, 2017 4:55:36 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
gb009761
Master Cruncher
Scotland
Joined: Apr 6, 2005
Post Count: 2982
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

Thank you jhindo for continuing the conversation. I'm sure a happy medium of communication can be found - after all, we all understand that everyone at WCG are busy, and thus, we're not looking for daily updates, just updates on a regular basis.

Perhaps summarising the monthly project meetings could suffice to keep everyone informed, happy and that feeling of "being kept in the loop".

Quick question - when a project proposal is put forward, do they have to submit some kind of rough estimate as to the likely volume of work? After all, as has been said in the past, surely there's a tipping point when the effort of on-boarding a project outweighs the rough estimate as to how much work there is to do in order to meet the projects goals. Obviously, at that early stage in the process, being able to calculate as to how many WU's for the entire project would be ridiculous - so that can't really be used as a measuring point for progress, but the number of "targets" the scientists are aiming for, perhaps could be.
----------------------------------------

[Apr 5, 2017 9:28:33 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher
USA
Joined: Jul 4, 2006
Post Count: 7633
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

jhindo +1
Cheers
----------------------------------------
Sgt. Joe
*Minnesota Crunchers*
[Apr 5, 2017 10:40:21 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
jhindo
Former World Community Grid Admin
Joined: Aug 25, 2009
Post Count: 250
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

Quick question - when a project proposal is put forward, do they have to submit some kind of rough estimate as to the likely volume of work? After all, as has been said in the past, surely there's a tipping point when the effort of on-boarding a project outweighs the rough estimate as to how much work there is to do in order to meet the projects goals. Obviously, at that early stage in the process, being able to calculate as to how many WU's for the entire project would be ridiculous - so that can't really be used as a measuring point for progress, but the number of "targets" the scientists are aiming for, perhaps could be.


During the proposal review process, we absolutely discuss the volume of work with the researchers. And as you mention, that is weighed against the effort of onboarding the project. So for a project that would be reusing a research application that's already ran on World Community Grid, that threshold is lower. But for a project that requires onboarding a new research application (a process that typically takes months), then we expect the volume of work to be significant. Overall, one of the most common reasons we turn down project proposals is that they're too small for World Community Grid (e.g. the work would be done in just a few days). At that point, we encourage the researchers to expand the scope of their work, or if relevant, we'll introduce them to one of our existing research partners who might already be working on a very similar study, in case they can collaborate.

Finally, worth noting that we've never set an upper limit in terms of project size. i.e. Our research partners are provided free access to World Community Grid for as long as the computing resource is valuable to their work.
[Apr 6, 2017 3:17:10 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher
USA
Joined: Jul 4, 2006
Post Count: 7633
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

Finally, worth noting that we've never set an upper limit in terms of project size. i.e. Our research partners are provided free access to World Community Grid for as long as the computing resource is valuable to their work.

Just as a side note, I seem to recall the scientists of the Leieshmaniasis project (not WCG) scaled back the scope of their project after having run for while.
Cheers
----------------------------------------
Sgt. Joe
*Minnesota Crunchers*
[Apr 6, 2017 3:23:30 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
gb009761
Master Cruncher
Scotland
Joined: Apr 6, 2005
Post Count: 2982
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

Again, thanks jhindo for your reply.

Yes, it makes sense to cut back on the project volume requirements when half the 'on-boarding' work has already been done via a previous project. As to the cries and upset/unpleasantness having a project only run for a few days/weeks would cause amongst the community/badge hunters - that'd be unimaginable. It'd certainly need to be strict rationing biggrin
----------------------------------------

[Apr 6, 2017 4:43:25 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
SekeRob
Master Cruncher
Joined: Jan 7, 2013
Post Count: 2741
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: 30 days before end warning

Well it does not need an epiphany to scale batches badges according to project duration/total work volume, just as it was done for ACAH. (waiting for uplinger to insert a but sputter)


[Apr 6, 2017 5:00:25 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Posts: 69   Pages: 7   [ Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next Page ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread