collaborating with competition

Please confine these topics to things that would be of general interest to those who are interested in FAH which don't fall into any other category.

Moderator: Site Moderators

Locked
theteofscuba
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:15 am
Hardware configuration: PS3, Phenom II X4, QX9775, HD 8570
Contact:

collaborating with competition

Post by theteofscuba »

I noticed that the university of washington is doing their own protein folding simulations -- Rosetta@Home. I have to wonder if Stanford collaborates with UWashington. Sharing results? Ensuring no protein simulations will overlap? Sharing source code? Maybe, quite possibly considering a merger?

Just throwing some ideas out there.
toTOW
Site Moderator
Posts: 6296
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France
Contact:

Re: collaborating with competition

Post by toTOW »

I read somewhere a long time ago that both projects were more complementary than competitives in the way they work, and what they study :)
Image

Folding@Home beta tester since 2002. Folding Forum moderator since July 2008.
anandhanju
Posts: 526
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:33 am
Location: Australia

Re: collaborating with competition

Post by anandhanju »

This is what Prof. Pande, Director of the Folding@home project had to say about Rosetta@home:
I know Baker and Ranganathan and their work very well and (like the rest of the protein community) find their work very important and impressive. However, Rosetta@home and Folding@Home are addressing very different problems.
Rosetta only predicts the final folded state, not how do proteins fold (and Rosetta has nothing to do with protein misfolding). Thus, those methods are not useful for the questions we're interested in and the diseases we're tackling (Alzheimer's Disease and other aggregation related diseases).
Also, one should note that accurate computational protein structure prediction is still very challenging compared to what one can do experimentally, whereas the information obtained from Folding@home on the nature of folding and misfolding pathways matches experiment (e.g. with quantitative validation in rates, free energy, etc) and then goes beyond what experiment can tell us in that arena. While Rosetta has gone a long way and is a very impressive project, given the choice between a Rosetta predicted structure and a crystal structure, one would always choose the crystal structure. I bet that will be changing due to their great efforts, but that may still be a ways off for that dream to be realized.
So, both are valuable projects IMHO, but addressing very different questions. I think there are some misunderstandings out there, though. Some people think FAH is all about structure prediction (which it is not -- that's Rosetta's strength) and some think Rosetta is about misfolding related disease (which it's not, that's Folding@Home's strength). Hopefully this post helps straighten some of that out.
Source: Wikipedia article on Rosetta@home.

Prof. Pande has recently posted an article (http://folding.typepad.com/news/2008/04 ... e-and.html) that details some of the collaborative efforts at FAH and making FAH results/techonologies available to other researchers.
theteofscuba
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:15 am
Hardware configuration: PS3, Phenom II X4, QX9775, HD 8570
Contact:

Re: collaborating with competition

Post by theteofscuba »

I took a look at Rosetta@Home and I've developed an opinion that BOINC is far more stable than any of the F@H clients I've used. I think maybe if F@H were to adopt BOINC there would be less problems.
Foxery
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:11 am
Hardware configuration: Intel Core2 Quad Q9300 (Intel P35 chipset)
Radeon 3850, 512MB model (Catalyst 8.10)
Windows XP, SP2
Location: Syracuse, NY

Re: collaborating with competition

Post by Foxery »

theteofscuba wrote:I took a look at Rosetta@Home and I've developed an opinion that BOINC is far more stable than any of the F@H clients I've used. I think maybe if F@H were to adopt BOINC there would be less problems.
As far as I can tell, F@H came first and is larger. They're not going to just rewrite everything for the hell of it...
Core2 Quad/Q9300, Radeon 3850/512MB (WinXP SP2)
toaster8
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:56 am
Hardware configuration: Model Name: Mac Pro
Model Identifier: MacPro3,1
Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Xeon
Processor Speed: 2.8 GHz
Number Of Processors: 2
Total Number Of Cores: 8
L2 Cache (per processor): 12 MB
Memory: 4 GB
Bus Speed: 1.6 GHz

Re: collaborating with competition

Post by toaster8 »

I tried BOINC before and found far too many problems/issues and at the time no real support. FAH has had a few bumps in the road for me but these forums always sorted me out. NOw, after running for a few months I have no issues and run different clients on different machines - most beta some not just to see how they run and so far they all run fine.
VijayPande
Pande Group Member
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:25 am
Location: Stanford

Re: collaborating with competition

Post by VijayPande »

theteofscuba wrote:I took a look at Rosetta@Home and I've developed an opinion that BOINC is far more stable than any of the F@H clients I've used. I think maybe if F@H were to adopt BOINC there would be less problems.
If you'd like a stable FAH client, we'd suggest you run the classic FAH client (the client analogous to what you'd get in other projects). Other distributed computing projects don't have an SMP/MPI, or GPU, or PS3 client, so comparing to FAH is apples to oranges in that case.

We did check out BOINC extensively (with lots of kind help from Dr. David Anderson, Director of BOINC), but in the end found that it wasn't a good match for our needs.
VijayPande
Pande Group Member
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:25 am
Location: Stanford

Re: collaborating with competition

Post by VijayPande »

PS As said by others in the thread above, our work is very complementary, so there isn't always a direct sharing of code, etc.

However, we are looking to see how FAH can help others. One example is the GPU code (most people would love to get a major speed up in their code). Also, thermodynamic sampling is an expertise of ours and we're looking to see how our methods could help calculations performed in Rosetta@home, amongst other projects.
7im
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: collaborating with competition

Post by 7im »

Asked and answered. Thread closed.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
Locked