re-visiting WU 1487

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

re-visiting WU 1487

Postby tmoble » Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:36 am

There was an extended thread on this WU on the old forum, don't know if they'll bring it back up or not?

Anyway, my 1487 ran from 10/28 to 11/27 or thereabouts, I don't see a date stamp at the end.
**********************************************************************************
[23:50:11] - User name: Tom (Team 53803)
[23:50:11] - User ID: 176E98968B81C32
[23:50:11] - Machine ID: 3
[23:50:11]
[23:50:11] Loaded queue successfully.
[23:50:11] + Benchmarking ...
[23:50:21]
[23:50:21] + Processing work unit
[23:50:21] Core required: FahCore_a0.exe
[23:50:21] Core found.
[23:50:21] Working on Unit 06 [October 28 23:50:21]
[23:50:21] + Working ...
[23:50:21]
[23:50:21] *------------------------------*
[23:50:21] Folding@Home Gromacs 3.3 Core
[23:50:21] Version 1.92 (April 17. 2007)
[23:50:21]
[23:50:21] Preparing to commence simulation
[23:50:21] - Ensuring status. Please wait.
[23:50:38] - Looking at optimizations...
[23:50:38] - Working with standard loops on this execution.
[23:50:38] - Previous termination of core was improper.
[23:50:38] - Files status OK
[23:50:39] - Expanded 3586837 -> 17225131 (decompressed 480.2 percent)
[23:50:39]
[23:50:39] Project: 1487 (Run 0, Clone 530, Gen 16)
[23:50:39]
[23:50:39] Entering M.D.
[23:51:02] (Starting from checkpoint)
[23:51:02] Protein: p1487_DPPC_DOPC_CHOL
[23:51:02] Writing local files
[23:51:02] Completed 45700 out of 2500000 steps (1%)
[23:51:06] Warning: long 1-4 interactions
[03:06:50] Writing local files
[03:06:51] Completed 50000 out of 2500000 steps (2 percent)
[21:43:31] Writing local files
[21:43:31] Completed 75000 out of 2500000 steps (3 percent)

.
.
.
.
[17:30:24] Writing local files
[17:30:24] Completed 2450000 out of 2500000 steps (98 percent)
[00:06:07] Writing local files
[00:06:07] Completed 2475000 out of 2500000 steps (99 percent)
[06:41:35] Writing local files
[06:41:36] Completed 2500000 out of 2500000 steps (100 percent)
[06:41:36] Writing final coordinates.
[06:41:37] Past main M.D. loop
[06:42:38]
[06:42:38] Finished Work Unit:
[06:42:38] - Reading up to 12661200 from "work/wudata_06.arc": Read 12661200
[06:42:38] - Reading up to 4499824 from "work/wudata_06.xtc": Read 4499824
[06:42:38] goefile size: 0
[06:42:38] logfile size: 41898
[06:42:38] Leaving Run
[06:42:42] - Writing 17210554 bytes of core data to disk...
[06:42:43] ... Done.
[06:42:52] - Shutting down core
[06:42:52]
[06:42:52] Folding@home Core Shutdown: FINISHED_UNIT
[06:42:58] CoreStatus = 64 (100)
[06:42:58] Sending work to server

[06:42:58] + Attempting to send results
[06:47:08] + Results successfully sent
[06:47:08] Thank you for your contribution to Folding@Home.
[06:47:08] + Number of Units Completed: 16
*******************************************************************************
I got 1161 points for this, I understood there was to be an adjustment and saw somebody on the temporary mail group saying that his was adjjusted to 17xx, about 50%.

So, how do I go about requesting this adjustment? Anybody know?

User name: Tom (Team 53803)
User ID: 176E98968B81C32
Project: 1487 (Run 0, Clone 530, Gen 16)
Protein: p1487_DPPC_DOPC_CHOL
tmoble
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:19 am
Location: Glendale, Az

Postby toTOW » Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:53 am

If you downloaded the WU before the adjustment, you'll get the old credit for it ... point adjustments are rarely retroactive.

P.S : there's another p1497 thread here http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?t=82 ... we may centralize this in a signle thread ...
Folding@Home beta tester since 2002. Folding Forum moderator since July 2008.

FAH-Addict : latest news, tests and reviews about Folding@Home project.

Image
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Postby tmoble » Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:41 pm

>> "If you downloaded the WU before the adjustment, you'll get the old credit for it ... point adjustments are rarely retroactive."

more or less same the unhelpful response I got on the mail list.

from the first post above: "So, how do I go about requesting this adjustment? Anybody know?"
tmoble
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:19 am
Location: Glendale, Az

Postby sortofageek » Mon Dec 03, 2007 7:11 pm

tmoble wrote: more or less same the unhelpful response I got on the mail list.

from the first post above: "So, how do I go about requesting this adjustment? Anybody know?"


Actually, it was a helpful response, IMO. While it might not be the response you wanted, it is most likely the accurate response and it is how I have seen it work.

As far as I know you can request by posting here, as you have already done.
User avatar
sortofageek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:06 pm
Location: Team Helix

Postby toTOW » Mon Dec 03, 2007 7:17 pm

tmoble wrote:from the first post above: "So, how do I go about requesting this adjustment? Anybody know?"


You want a clear answer : you can't.

You don't like it, and you're not the only one in this case, but it's the way it is.
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Postby sortofageek » Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:42 pm

tmoble, if it is any comfort to you at all, I have completed 29 of those monsters and best guess tells me 25-27 of them were done at the initial credit amount. So, you're not alone. This happens now and then and, the good thing is, it happens to everybody, so it's not like anybody had an unfair advantage. :)

My 29 ---> http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/mai ... range=1000
User avatar
sortofageek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:06 pm
Location: Team Helix

Postby 7im » Mon Dec 03, 2007 9:08 pm

tmoble wrote:...more or less same the unhelpful response I got on the mail list.


The answers don't change when you ask them in a different location. I just quoted project policy on the mailing list, just as sortofageek did so here.

Feel free to send a PM to the principle investigator to make a special request. I'll apologize in advance if you get the same answer as you did here.
User avatar
7im
 
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:30 pm
Location: Arizona

Postby Flathead74 » Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:51 am

The principle investigator could be very busy, so don't be surprised if you don't get a reply.
Flathead74
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 7:08 pm
Location: Central New York

Postby tmoble » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:48 am

I PM'd him, he answered soonly. Same stuff though. Everybody sez I can't get the right points if I started the WU after some mysterious date, but nobody seems to want to post that date. I don't understand why it's such a mystery. Maybe I'm to think these people don't know how their own stuff works? Considering the circumstances and attitudes displayed so far I'm now left guessing it has something to do with who is asking. Insufficient status or something.


I recall that the reason I got interested in this to begin with was my Dad and Sister. He had MS, bedridden 40 years till his death, she went blind with RP at 6 years but went on to get her J.D. and practice law till her death after repeated bouts with breast and brain cancer. I liked the idea of being able to help with research that might benefit others in similar positions. Still do, I guess.
tmoble
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:19 am
Location: Glendale, Az

Postby sortofageek » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:58 am

tmoble wrote: I liked the idea of being able to help with research that might benefit others in similar positions. Still do, I guess.


I liked that, too, when I started folding in December 2001. I still do. :)
User avatar
sortofageek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:06 pm
Location: Team Helix

Postby toTOW » Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:56 pm

tmoble wrote: but nobody seems to want to post that date


It's just because we don't remember ... it was announced on the old forum ... but as it's currently unaviable, we can't answer.
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Postby kasson » Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:35 pm

The effective date for the points change was the date of my post announcing it in the previous forum. Unfortunately, since that forum is not available at this time, retrieving the date is non-trivial. While we could reconstruct the date with some effort, I'm not sure what is to be gained from doing so. The time spent on such an endeavor would detract from other FAH-related tasks (there are only 24 hours in the day), and by definition the date is that after which all new WU's received the new points value.

We implemented a points change (which is itself unusual for us) in response to donor concerns. By setting and applying a consistent policy, we try to apply the change in a manner that we consider as fair as possible.
kasson
Pande Group Member
 
Posts: 1459
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:37 pm

Postby tmoble » Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:52 pm

>> "It's just because we don't remember ... it was announced on the old forum ... but as it's currently unaviable, we can't answer."

Ah, the answer, finally. OK, that's what I was asking, why it took so long to get I have no idea and hopefully will remain blissfully unaware. Fold on regardless and all that.
tmoble
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:19 am
Location: Glendale, Az


Return to Discussions of General-FAH topics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron