New App status

The thing is, unless/until a new application is out with work units that have a rational run time (say 30 minutes MINIMUM), this project is doomed to the currently persistent problem of excess server I/O traffic causing short terms outages AND simply running out of work to hand out.

I am REALLY hoping that Travis and the other project folks are working toward this goal with their work units, as until that is dealt with, there is bound to be not only frustration on the user side with server short term outages and persistent work outages causing folks to push harder to get work causing more server problems and outages, but alos those outages and the need to generate unreasonably large work unit counts have got to be placing a load on the project folks.

I've seen some discussion about this, but nothing in terms of new work units that allow folks to see more than a 2 hour max work cache. That simply won't cut it.

---

So the whole goal of this Project is to make the Wu's faster just so they can make them longer ... ;) hahaha

I believe that would be called processing more data.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

So the whole goal of this Project is to make the Wu's faster just so they can make them longer

Yup. Try asking for that at S@H or Primegrid...

---

So the whole goal of this Project is to make the Wu's faster just so they can make them longer

Yup. Try asking for that at S@H or Primegrid...

SETI has done the same multiple times. The circumstances there were when processing power became high enough to where more thorough analysis could be done, more thorough analysis was introduced into the application...

Travis wrote:

Actually to correct some misinformation here. The RPI computer science department as a whole does not run this project. There is myself, Nate, dave, and our 4 advisors (1 professor in the physics dept, and 3 in the cs dept). Our advisors have quite a few other projects they're working on (and I myself have another one or two). Either way, the bulk of the work on this project is done by myself, dave and nate. 3 people, not 440. We also have classes and our degree requirements to attend to. This is the nature of graduate level research.

Right now we're operating off an NSF grant which pays for our hardware, Nate, myself and a couple undergrad researchers.

The scientific credibility of Milkway@Home would be well served by explicitly posting the names of the Principal Investigators (the professors), their affiliations, and an acknowledgment to the NSF (including grant number) on the project home page.

That information would facilitate the evaluation of the project on the part of volunteer participants that care about the science being pursued. Acknowledgment of funding sources is just the norm in the profession.

Best regards,
EigenState

@ EigenState

Ohhh ,,my jaw is on the floor !!

Do you really believe the next door Hillbilly can just that easy add his project for participation in Boinc? Is this really the sense of your comment?
The project is hosted under an *.edu address and you need more evidences?

First some guys from one forum attacked this project and now this! It's hard to believe what you have posted.

Please remove your comment or edit it. It's ridiculous!

---

@ EigenState

Ohhh ,,my jaw is on the floor !!

Do you really believe the next door Hillbilly can just that easy add his project for participation in Boinc? Is this really the sense of your comment?
The project is hosted under an *.edu address and you need more evidences?

First some guys from one forum attacked this project and now this! It's hard to believe what you have posted.

Please remove your comment or edit it. It's ridiculous!

LOL...

Agreed! Apparently EigenState didn't bother reading any of the papers and other publications listed on the front page. ;-)

I didn't see the NSF Grant Number in any of them (I wasn't looking that hard ), but the other info was there for all to see.

IIRC, NSF Grantees and supported projects are a matter of public record, so it shouldn't be too hard to put 2 and 2 together.

Alinator

@ EigenState

Ohhh ,,my jaw is on the floor !!

Do you really believe the next door Hillbilly can just that easy add his project for participation in Boinc? Is this really the sense of your comment?
The project is hosted under an *.edu address and you need more evidences?

First some guys from one forum attacked this project and now this! It's hard to believe what you have posted.

Please remove your comment or edit it. It's ridiculous!

Ridiculous to wish to read the NSF grant proposal that supports the project? Ridiculous to wish to review the reputation of the Principal Investigators and their prior contributions to the field? Ridiculous to note that professional ethics demand explicit acknowledgment of any and all funding sources?

My comment stands firm.

So if someone wanted to personally fund a project, that wouldn't be REAL science since there isn't a NSF grant # by it's name?


Reputations aren't big to me, from my experience even the best can turn out to be the worst.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

Ridiculous to wish to read the NSF grant proposal that supports the project? Ridiculous to wish to review the reputation of the Principal Investigators and their prior contributions to the field? Ridiculous to note that professional ethics demand explicit acknowledgment of any and all funding sources?

My comment stands firm.

Well, you might be disappointed in what you find in grant proposal that Travis is operating under, since MW is the 'vehicle' science application that they are running their GMLE on the BOINC platform experiment.

From reading the papers, it looked to me like the AstroInformatics Group was kind of riding on the coattails of that somewhat. However they may have funding of their own which they chip in some to help out here.

In any event, I don't think they are under any obligation to reveal their funding sources if they choose not to. You make it sound like they are trying to masquerade some kind of commercial for profit endeavour as a publicly funded science research project.

Alinator

So if someone wanted to personally fund a project, that wouldn't be REAL science since there isn't a NSF grant # by it's name?


Reputations aren't big to me, from my experience even the best can turn out to be the worst.

LOL...

Yep, if it is a privately funded for profit project, then I want a 'piece of the action' if I crunch for it! ;-)

As far as the rest goes... Some of the smartest people I know have a serious lack of common sense (apparently)! :-D

Alinator

@ EigenState

All these last weeks this project has been targeted from those moonbats, don't misunderstand me but your comment serve to feed only these creepy moonbats.

The projects Administrators are really nice guys and they keep informing us in daily basis, they are doing well.

The answers you wanna have , i believe only the Administrators can provide them to you. Is it that hard to write them a pm?

Don't feed the moonbats!

---

Greetings Gentlemen,

What you apparently fail to realize is that my suggestion would in fact protect the project's NSF funding base in that the NSF requires formal acknowledgment. The following is quoted from the NSF website:

I. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SUPPORT AND DISCLAIMER

An acknowledgment of NSF support and a disclaimer must appear in publications (including Web pages) of any material, whether copyrighted or not, based on or developed under NSF-supported projects:

“This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. (grantee must enter NSF grant number).”

NSF support also must be orally acknowledged during all news media interviews, including popular media such as radio, television and news magazines.

Except for articles or papers published in scientific, technical or professional journals, the following disclaimer must be included:

“Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.”

The NSF's policies are very clear. I rest my case and shall make no further contributions to this exchange.

Best regards,
EigenState

Might I suggest looking up first next time before posting.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

Greetings Gentlemen,

What you apparently fail to realize is that my suggestion would in fact protect the project's NSF funding base in that the NSF requires formal acknowledgment. The following is quoted from the NSF website:

I. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SUPPORT AND DISCLAIMER

An acknowledgment of NSF support and a disclaimer must appear in publications (including Web pages) of any material, whether copyrighted or not, based on or developed under NSF-supported projects:

“This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. (grantee must enter NSF grant number).”

NSF support also must be orally acknowledged during all news media interviews, including popular media such as radio, television and news magazines.

Except for articles or papers published in scientific, technical or professional journals, the following disclaimer must be included:

“Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.”

The NSF's policies are very clear. I rest my case and shall make no further contributions to this exchange.

Best regards,
EigenState

And what you are failing to take into account is that this project is run under the auspices of the AstroInformatics Group.

Therefore there are several possibilities:

1.) AstroInformatics doesn't have an NSF Grant, therefore they have no reason to post or display anything regarding it.

2.) They have one and it is just an oversight on their part.

3.) The overall structure of the the arrangements between principals is not fully apparent to us, and thus we can't make any conclusions about what should or shouldn't be published on the MW web site.

In any event, it is extremely bad taste to come around and make accusations, demands, and state conclusions about other peoples ethics when you may not have the first clue about what you are talking about.

Alinator

And what you are failing to take into account is that this project is run under the auspices of the AstroInformatics Group.

Therefore there are several possibilities:

1.) AstroInformatics doesn't have an NSF Grant, therefore they have no reason to post or display anything regarding it.

2.) They have one and it is just an oversight on their part.

3.) The overall structure of the the arrangements between principals is not fully apparent to us, and thus we can't make any conclusions about what should or shouldn't be published on the MW web site.

In any event, it is extremely bad taste to come around and make accusations, demands, and state conclusions about other peoples ethics when you may not have the first clue about what you are talking about.

Alinator

Agreed 100% As far as I know (which isn't much) this is run by 2 grad students doing research for their papers. It's done within the university and I haven't heard any suggestions that the NSF was funding anything. Depending on the results that the project comes up with it might (HOPEFULLY) turn into a significant research project that the NSF at a future time might want to explore.

So to bring this further, if this isn't a scientific project, then I guess I need to change my perspective from helping in a scientific manner to just being a credit whore. <--- and not a very good one at that. <Sigh>

---

I think people need to chill out.

As for acknowledging grants / funding. It would depend on the policy of the university / organization and the funding body (where the money is coming from).

For example, I am a PhD student at an Australian university (I'm in my office now as I type this). I do not have a grant or funding as such to do my research / work. However I have been given / awarded a government funded scholarship that pays me a living allowance allowing me to support my way in life while doing this. In my work and publications I don't have to make any reference or acknowledgment to this scholarship as it is merely a loving allowance (or wage as we are told to consider it) and is available for students regardless of their research field.

Having said that, I have used the HPC (High Performance Computer) at the university for some of my research (I have joked to my team mates about getting Boinc on to it). It costs me nothing to run and use this resource, but it costs that division and ultimately the university a significant amount of money each year to run. Now the HPC receives funding and grants from various places. As part of the arrangement the those funding the HPC want to see that the money is supporting work. So anyone who uses the HPC is required to publicly acknowledge that they have. Recently I have published a research paper where I had to, by university policy, include an acknowledgment "Computational resources and services used in this work were provided by the HPC and Research Support Unit, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia." That way everyone who sees this paper is aware that the HPC helped. This helps them secure future funding.

University policy also requires everyone at the end of the year submit a list and copy of all papers, journals, books (sections and otherwise) etc that the published for that year while at the university. This allows the university to compile a list that is public knowledge and can be used to help secure future grants / funds for research etc. I still have to submit my papers to the list, but I am waiting until mid December as I have another paper to be presented then.

Everywhere is different of course.

---

Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

I think people need to chill out.

Well said Gavin and Brian