More merger proposals

log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : More merger proposals

1 · 2 · Next
Author Message
Dirk Broer
     
Send message
Joined: 3 Nov 10
Posts: 38
Credit: 1,056,730
RAC: 692
Total hours: 2,227,389
Message 5289 - Posted: 30 Jun 2017, 9:25:41 UTC

vLHCathome-dev - Sixtrack Simulation = lhcathome-dev - Sixtrack Simulation
vLHCathome-dev - ATLAS Simulation = lhcathome-dev - ATLAS Simulation

vLHCathome-dev became lhcathome-dev with the same forum and applications, it was a mere name change.

ATLAS@home - ATLAS Simulation = LHC@home - ATLAS Simulation

VirtualLHC@home - LHCb Simulations = LHC@home - LHCb Simulation
VirtualLHC@home - CMS Simulation = LHC@home - CMS Simulation

LHC@home is the new name for LHC@Home 1.0, incorporating -amongst others- also the old ATLAS@home, Beauty@Home and VirtualLHC@home.
____________

mmonnin
   
Send message
Joined: 22 Aug 16
Posts: 96
Credit: 347,168
RAC: 568
Total hours: 1,105,211
Message 5290 - Posted: 30 Jun 2017, 9:53:43 UTC - in response to Message 5289.

This is just a deliberate post to piss people off. Thats the only thing this is going to accomplish.

Dirk Broer
     
Send message
Joined: 3 Nov 10
Posts: 38
Credit: 1,056,730
RAC: 692
Total hours: 2,227,389
Message 5291 - Posted: 30 Jun 2017, 10:56:01 UTC - in response to Message 5290.
Last modified: 30 Jun 2017, 11:16:08 UTC

These are the exact same applications that have been used under two project names and where the credits were carried over (even the same badges counted where applicable, ATLAS and the joindate was carried over too). If people get pissed off by this, I can't help it.
____________

Profile KPX
       
Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 10
Posts: 35
Credit: 553,684
RAC: 164
Total hours: 903,799
Message 5292 - Posted: 30 Jun 2017, 12:42:46 UTC - in response to Message 5290.

This is just a deliberate post to piss people off. Thats the only thing this is going to accomplish.

I agree. Let's keep things as they are, including all historical anomalies. No more mergers needed, really.

Dirk Broer
     
Send message
Joined: 3 Nov 10
Posts: 38
Credit: 1,056,730
RAC: 692
Total hours: 2,227,389
Message 5293 - Posted: 30 Jun 2017, 12:54:57 UTC - in response to Message 5292.

This is just a deliberate post to piss people off. Thats the only thing this is going to accomplish.

I agree. Let's keep things as they are, including all historical anomalies. No more mergers needed, really.


I don't agree. It should be hours per application, not hours per name change.
____________

Profile skgiven
       
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 7 Sep 10
Posts: 422
Credit: 843,423
RAC: 206
Total hours: 1,640,081
Message 5295 - Posted: 30 Jun 2017, 17:06:26 UTC - in response to Message 5293.
Last modified: 30 Jun 2017, 17:09:57 UTC

I'm happy with the data merge, but I would have preferred for it to have occurred earlier, so as not to disappoint those with new stars/badges, & to prevent people wasting time selecting apps to reach goals.

The problem with new projects that are re-incarnations of old projects is that you usually have to rejoin, so it's a bit more than a name change, and the apps might have changed a bit too.

This is different (more simple) to the situation where two or more existing projects (that run/ran in parallel) use the same apps; they might run different analysis on the results, or run the apps in different areas, or not...

Dirk Broer
     
Send message
Joined: 3 Nov 10
Posts: 38
Credit: 1,056,730
RAC: 692
Total hours: 2,227,389
Message 5298 - Posted: 30 Jun 2017, 19:40:13 UTC - in response to Message 5295.

GCC is a plain continuation of Goofyx, sharing points, badges and even the forum. I've pointed this out before and also mentioned LHC@Home applications then.
____________

Profile Steve Hawker*
       
Send message
Joined: 31 Oct 12
Posts: 125
Credit: 642,670
RAC: 117
Total hours: 1,555,843
Message 5299 - Posted: 30 Jun 2017, 22:29:33 UTC - in response to Message 5293.

This is just a deliberate post to piss people off. Thats the only thing this is going to accomplish.

I agree. Let's keep things as they are, including all historical anomalies. No more mergers needed, really.


I don't agree. It should be hours per application, not hours per name change.


They were being sarcastic

mmonnin
   
Send message
Joined: 22 Aug 16
Posts: 96
Credit: 347,168
RAC: 568
Total hours: 1,105,211
Message 5300 - Posted: 1 Jul 2017, 0:57:17 UTC
Last modified: 1 Jul 2017, 0:59:36 UTC

Then lets not-half ass it:



Lets get all of the WCG Beta apps combined into one as well...

I bet that will be popular as well.

Profile Coleslaw
       
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 10
Posts: 166
Credit: 4,271,854
RAC: 1,358
Total hours: 7,342,842
Message 5301 - Posted: 1 Jul 2017, 2:19:05 UTC

I guess we better go back in time and split CSG from Wildlife, Subsetsum, and DNA...
____________

Dirk Broer
     
Send message
Joined: 3 Nov 10
Posts: 38
Credit: 1,056,730
RAC: 692
Total hours: 2,227,389
Message 5304 - Posted: 1 Jul 2017, 9:47:34 UTC - in response to Message 5301.
Last modified: 1 Jul 2017, 9:55:52 UTC

I guess we better go back in time and split CSG from Wildlife, Subsetsum, and DNA...

I don't see a problem with CSG.
My CSG apps:
Project Application Running time (hours) Last day (hours)
Citizen Science Grid SubsetSum@Home Sum Calculator 32,818.35 0.00
Citizen Science Grid DNA@Home Gibbs Sampler 10,132.70 0.00
Citizen Science Grid EXACT Convolutional Neural Network Trainer 5,333.55 0.00
Citizen Science Grid EXACT MNIST Convolutional Neural Network Trainer 707.62 0.00
Citizen Science Grid EXACT MNIST Batch Norm CNN Trainer 622.25 76.52
Citizen Science Grid EXACT MNIST Batch CNN Trainer 2.0 603.20 0.00
Citizen Science Grid Wildlife@Home Video Background Subtractor 73.00 0.00
Citizen Science Grid EXACT MNIST Batch Convolutional Neural Network Trainer 4.30 0.00

Nothing double, unlike LHC@Home (which is a conglomerate of various old CERN projects under a new, common name and using the old appllications, scores and forums)
____________

Profile Coleslaw
       
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 10
Posts: 166
Credit: 4,271,854
RAC: 1,358
Total hours: 7,342,842
Message 5305 - Posted: 1 Jul 2017, 15:51:18 UTC - in response to Message 5304.
Last modified: 1 Jul 2017, 15:52:44 UTC

Dirk, I am agreeing that they should be merged and not split. I was using a bit of sarcasm about the current banter about not merging goofy/GCC and LHC applications.

CSG had all of its apps merged with the former independent projects, and so these complainers should have complained back then.
____________

Profile Skivelitis2
   
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 8 Nov 14
Posts: 14
Credit: 431,570
RAC: 682
Total hours: 952,335
Message 5306 - Posted: 1 Jul 2017, 19:09:55 UTC

As one that has lost a couple of what few stars I have, I completely agree with the app mergers. We all know that the apps are the same regardless of project name changes, mergers, etc., and a true representation of our contribution is what should be sought. Otherwise, an "ingenious" project admin will eventually come along and change app names regularly so as to attract crunchers and make a mockery of the entire system. None of us want this.
____________

Profile Steve Hawker*
       
Send message
Joined: 31 Oct 12
Posts: 125
Credit: 642,670
RAC: 117
Total hours: 1,555,843
Message 5311 - Posted: 2 Jul 2017, 2:58:43 UTC - in response to Message 5306.

As one that has lost a couple of what few stars I have, I completely agree with the app mergers. We all know that the apps are the same regardless of project name changes, mergers, etc., and a true representation of our contribution is what should be sought. Otherwise, an "ingenious" project admin will eventually come along and change app names regularly so as to attract crunchers and make a mockery of the entire system. None of us want this.


Universe and CSG come to mind already

Profile Daniel
   
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 16
Posts: 50
Credit: 172,157
RAC: 489
Total hours: 1,638,932
Message 5312 - Posted: 2 Jul 2017, 9:05:05 UTC - in response to Message 5311.

As one that has lost a couple of what few stars I have, I completely agree with the app mergers. We all know that the apps are the same regardless of project name changes, mergers, etc., and a true representation of our contribution is what should be sought. Otherwise, an "ingenious" project admin will eventually come along and change app names regularly so as to attract crunchers and make a mockery of the entire system. None of us want this.


Universe and CSG come to mind already

I do not know about Universe. In CSG case they introduced new apps with changes which made them incompatible with previous app version, so they decided to add new app instead of simply bumping app version. BTW, similar thing was done by TN-Grid too, they also made backward-incompatible change and decided to release new app instead of new version of existing one.
____________

mmonnin
   
Send message
Joined: 22 Aug 16
Posts: 96
Credit: 347,168
RAC: 568
Total hours: 1,105,211
Message 5313 - Posted: 2 Jul 2017, 10:49:29 UTC - in response to Message 5312.

As one that has lost a couple of what few stars I have, I completely agree with the app mergers. We all know that the apps are the same regardless of project name changes, mergers, etc., and a true representation of our contribution is what should be sought. Otherwise, an "ingenious" project admin will eventually come along and change app names regularly so as to attract crunchers and make a mockery of the entire system. None of us want this.


Universe and CSG come to mind already

I do not know about Universe. In CSG case they introduced new apps with changes which made them incompatible with previous app version, so they decided to add new app instead of simply bumping app version. BTW, similar thing was done by TN-Grid too, they also made backward-incompatible change and decided to release new app instead of new version of existing one.


Yeah for awhile it seemed there was a new CSG app version every week.

Maybe for Universe it was BHSpin and BHSpin v2?

Profile skgiven
       
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 7 Sep 10
Posts: 422
Credit: 843,423
RAC: 206
Total hours: 1,640,081
Message 5314 - Posted: 2 Jul 2017, 12:13:40 UTC - in response to Message 5313.
Last modified: 2 Jul 2017, 13:06:41 UTC

The main issues are the timing and the fact that the WUProp badges are not simple multiples (which exasperates the timing).
Nobody would have cared if this was performed as soon as the projects relaunched/re-branded/renamed/split or merged. After several months it becomes an issue, especially if the apps are deprecated - new targets can't be met.

If the badges had been 100h, 200h, 400h... rather than 100h, 250h, 500h, 1000h, 2500h then when the hours were merged, previously reached targets would often result in an upgrade of one star and the loss of another; 100h + 100h = 200h (silver rather than 2 bronze). At present that's only sometimes the case, and often not:

LHC@home ATLAS Simulation 904.07 353.58

900h is nowhere; could have been made from 500h + 250h + 100h.
Loses 2 stars & doesn't increase any star values!

This isn't a complaint, it's just an explanation of the negative side to the timing of the data mergers.

Profile STE\/E
         
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 28 Mar 10
Posts: 360
Credit: 3,059,054
RAC: 1,127
Total hours: 16,117,672
Message 5315 - Posted: 2 Jul 2017, 13:03:54 UTC - in response to Message 5314.

The main issues are the timing and the fact that the WUProp badges are not simple multiples (which exasperates the timing).
Nobody would have cared if this was performed as soon as the projects relaunched/re-branded/renamed/split or merged. After several months it becomes an issue, especially if the apps are deprecated - new targets can't be met.

If the badges had been 100h, 200h, 400h... rather than 100h, 250h, 500h, 1000h, 2500h then when the hours were merged, previously reached targets would often result in an upgrade of one star and the loss of another; 100h + 100h = 200h (silver rather than 2 bronze). At present that's only sometimes the case, and often not:

LHC@home ATLAS Simulation 904.07 353.58

900h is nowhere; likely made from 500h + 250h + 100h.
Loses 2 stars & doesn't increase any star values!

This isn't a complaint, it's just an explanation of the negative side to the timing of the data mergers.


I have to agree with this, I run the App's to a certain point & then go on to the next App thinking that's where the previous app will stay. Merging them now throws everything off & if it's dead app's that are merged then that's where it will forever stay with no hope of moving it up to the next Hr Level.

Might as well throw all the Sr Base App's together too since the App Names are all practically the same, I can lose 8 more App's that way & it will make the I don't want all these App boys all the happier too.

All I can say if you don't want the App's & Stars that go with them then go run another Project that doesn't have Badges ... :P

Profile KPX
       
Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 10
Posts: 35
Credit: 553,684
RAC: 164
Total hours: 903,799
Message 5316 - Posted: 2 Jul 2017, 13:09:45 UTC - in response to Message 5306.

... None of us want this.

None of us? Why? I really despise this self-righteous "I speak for everybody" attitude. Next time try just speaking for yourself.

Profile Skivelitis2
   
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 8 Nov 14
Posts: 14
Credit: 431,570
RAC: 682
Total hours: 952,335
Message 5317 - Posted: 2 Jul 2017, 13:43:54 UTC - in response to Message 5316.

... None of us want this.

None of us? Why? I really despise this self-righteous "I speak for everybody" attitude. Next time try just speaking for yourself.

Well, since you want your own voice, do you have anything constructive to add?

1 · 2 · Next
Post to thread

Message boards : Number crunching : More merger proposals


Home | My Account | Message Boards | Results


Copyright © 2017 Sebastien