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.

---

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

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.

---

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.

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.

---

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...

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.

---

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

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.

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

---

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)

---

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.

---

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.

---

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

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.

---

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?

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.

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

... 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.

... 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?