| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: Smash Childhood Cancer
Thread: 30 days before end warning |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 69
|
|
| Author |
|
|
I need a bath
Senior Cruncher USA Joined: Apr 12, 2007 Post Count: 347 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I remember it well
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Well it does not need an epiphany to scale  I remember it well Ah, chasing the elusive sun. That project came and went like a fart in the wind. I managed to get 13 WUs for that project totaling 5 days. I believe the techs will argue that this project had much more work than AC@H. I managed to grab sapphire, but will never make it to diamond. |
||
|
|
KLiK
Master Cruncher Croatia Joined: Nov 13, 2006 Post Count: 3108 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
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  +1 As they have MoM, they can only use some kind of censure & release it for us!  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. Well, jhindo - I do know they are inaccurate. They are as inaccurate as the "copy of 1GB estimates from 25min down to 1min or less". Why do I use that example? As some of you experienced the data transfer go faster with the big files, but slows down when a many smaller files are read & written. Here's the similar principle, just very opposite: smaller WUs give faster response times & gets ECD closer. We all know they are inaccurate & never will they be accurate like the ones you could have if you run simulations on a "dedicated cloud server". But we're not a dedicated server of some company. We use our own computer, but also use them on our 2nd goals of getting data crunched by WCG. We're, after all, talking about a bunch of us here, someone maybe didn't turn on the computer, someone started to update the system so the reboot will take several hours, someone started some game so the BOINC is paused for duration of several hours, etc. So osculations are normal & expected. But even with those, you have a decent amount of work to guess the ECD in a month time. After all, that's good if we're under 50%...guess what, even (example) Q1 of 2019 is good enough if we're going to play a little game of "hunting badges" on WCG! What's to tell? Yes, some of us are just like "boy scouts"...  Anyway, as we get to project's end, the ECD will be more & more accurate. Down to month (above 67%), down to week (above 90%), down to a day (when we get to 99%)...& even then, we might also have retakes for confirmations, so the ECD is still going to be wrong! Just give up from getting us the real hour in a date of the ECD, it's pointless. & give us some rough estimate of months, & then week, & then a full date of ECD when it to that certainty (99% or above)...But like scanning a computer for viruses or coping a large amount of files - you can never guess how much time it would take for a ECD. So the Guess is OK. What is NOT OK, is when you have only percentages. As some projects are longer then others (compare just FAAH & a ZIKA or SCC). So those percentages don't mean anything else, then a clue how accurate is the ECD calculated. Believe me, planning is what I do. So even though you plan, it still going to be of by a fair margin. But that plan & estimate is better than nothing during feasibility studies, process planning, industrialization, etc. So having some way of percentage & ECD listed, even in brackets (which shows it's not for sure, only rough estimate) will have more information than now. & BTW, if you complicate if further with number of batches, it will only get people unknown what the batches are. They still have a world to walk into with BOINC (what is project on BOINC, what is WCG project, what is WU, what are heating problems, etc....), so please don't complicate more. Just put "rough estimate" or "inaccurate estimate" above the projects % line with some month/year & everything will be just fine with us & everybody new! Just keep it simple.  |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Just put "rough estimate" or "inaccurate estimate" above the projects % line with some month/year & everything will be just fine with us & everybody new! Just keep it simple. That's not fine with me and please don't speak on my behalf. I would like to see a starting batch number and total number of known batches. I can take it from there. The operative word is "known". WCG knows the number of batches given to them from the researchers as we have seen before. There is no need to try and predict what the researchers might do in the future. Simply provide the starting batch number and batch counts as they are sent to you. I can figure the daily batch rate and then determine an estimated end date. Yes, dates and rates will fluctuate but that is OK. As long as we have batch counts we can track it from there. Very similar to what Dr. Perryman was doing with the Malaria project and FAH when he was at Scripps (although he was more detailed than just counts). |
||
|
|
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher USA Joined: Jul 4, 2006 Post Count: 7844 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I would like to see a starting batch number and total number of known batches. I can take it from there. The operative word is "known". Well said.This approach would work well for some projects in my opinion. However there are some projects which are/have used the results from the existing work units to generate new work units. If there is a one to one correspondence which exists, that would make estimating a little easier, especially if the iterations are known. If the iterations are unknown and/or there is a one to many correspondence (one work unit generates an unknown number of daughter work units), then any estimation of the end of project is going to be an exercise in futility. I am pretty sure most of the scientists who work on these projects have some idea of the scope of their project(s) which may in the end be dictated by their funding. I am always appreciative of any credible information which is disseminated and I do understand the scientists working at the bleeding edge are working with a myriad of unknowns. So, the bottom line is do the best you can with the information you have. Cheers
Sgt. Joe
----------------------------------------*Minnesota Crunchers* [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sgt.Joe at Apr 8, 2017 12:55:53 AM] |
||
|
|
Seoulpowergrid
Veteran Cruncher Joined: Apr 12, 2013 Post Count: 823 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
+1 to the idea of posting known work units when applicable.
----------------------------------------And I'd love to see something like a stoplight; red, yellow, green, or such to indictate how open ended the project is / the probability of more WUs being added.  |
||
|
|
KLiK
Master Cruncher Croatia Joined: Nov 13, 2006 Post Count: 3108 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Just put "rough estimate" or "inaccurate estimate" above the projects % line with some month/year & everything will be just fine with us & everybody new! Just keep it simple. That's not fine with me and please don't speak on my behalf. I would like to see a starting batch number and total number of known batches. I can take it from there. The operative word is "known". WCG knows the number of batches given to them from the researchers as we have seen before. There is no need to try and predict what the researchers might do in the future. Simply provide the starting batch number and batch counts as they are sent to you. I can figure the daily batch rate and then determine an estimated end date. Yes, dates and rates will fluctuate but that is OK. As long as we have batch counts we can track it from there. Very similar to what Dr. Perryman was doing with the Malaria project and FAH when he was at Scripps (although he was more detailed than just counts). You're forgetting a saying: "Better a sparrow in the hand than a pigeon on the roof!" & no, no & no! 1st of all: NEW people don't know **** about BOINC. So don't make them use the language of an advanced BOINC user. Want proof, here: https://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/viewthread_thread,39890 Guy or a girl is struggling with comprehending the words like: "Points", "Results"," Rankings". & you want to put words like batches on the main page! 2nd, how do you know there's some NDA signed between WCG & the researcher about what they are researching? Yes, the results will be PUBLIC. But that doesn't mean that the undergoing research wouldn't have a signed NDA! So you're asking much from WCG. & if you ask why an NDA? Well, scientific papers are a race sometimes. So whoever gets there first, get to do post a genuine research. That's why NDA. 3rd, like Sgt.Joe has said, not all project run on batches! Better think it through next time, before asking such disclosure. And I'd love to see something like a stoplight; red, yellow, green, or such to indictate how open ended the project is / the probability of more WUs being added. I can agree to "stoplight sign", that's an industry standard in whole of production. *edited to appropriate forum language - ErikaT ---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by ErikaT at Apr 10, 2017 10:38:01 AM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
First of all, CALM DOWN!!! Nobody insulted you. All I did was request that you not speak on my (or other crunchers) behalf by using the word "US". You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. What may be OK with you may not be OK with others. It seems when somebody disagrees with you, you take it as some sort of insult and start using inappropriate forum language and start telling others what you think they should do from now on. If you are as truly educated and intelligent as you have indicated in these forums over the past few years, there shouldn't be any reason why you would object to a legitimate debate on the merits of an idea. My only conclusion would be that you feel your idea has no merit or you are incapable of defending it in a rational manner. Second, I'm not making anybody use any language, advanced or not. They are free to read and use whatever they find is useful to them. I wouldn't suggest insulting anyone's intelligence by "dumbing down" the discussion. If a new cruncher is initially having trouble with the BOINC concepts, they can always ask questions until they learn the concepts. It seems your idea is to only put out the basic information and deny others the opportunity to learn. Thirdly, if you go back and read my post, I didn't suggest putting ANYTHING on the main page. I only stated what information I would like to see. I will let WCG decide where the most appropriate place should be. Fourth, What does an NDA have to do with anything? Batch numbers and counts have absolutely nothing to do with the research data. As a matter of fact, I would strongly suggest that batches are a WCG thing and not related to the research. It is just a way of breaking up the computational work into manageable sizes for the grid. Lastly, your item you labeled as "3rd" is blatantly a false statement. EVERY project since 2004 has had batches. What Sgt. Joe indicated, and rightfully so, is that not all work runs as unique batches. There is some work that is 'dependent" on work before it and therefore is generational in nature which makes knowing the number of future batches a lot more problematic. I agree and we would have to find a way around those or except them as "one offs". What he did was point out a potential "flaw" in my idea but, unlike you, I can accept that.
|
||
|
|
JimWork
Cruncher Canada Joined: Oct 11, 2005 Post Count: 35 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Doneske +1 I couldn't have said it better myself.
|
||
|
|
masteraip
Advanced Cruncher Bulgaria Joined: Jul 27, 2016 Post Count: 71 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Doneske +1 from me too.
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
|