How many points have been awarded in total?

[api]

If we sum over all users and all teams (including anonymous) how many points have been awarded since the beginning of FAH?

[Joe_H]

19.4 trillion - https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com ... ary.php?s=

You can add it up yourself, they put out files every 3 hours that can be downloaded from the official stats page - https://foldingathome.org/statistics/?lng=en. Look for the donor and team lists (txt) download links on the page. EOC has been doing this and providing a stats summaries alternative for years.

[aetch]

One thing to note, all users contribute to a team (even if it's default team 0) so the user total should equal the team total. Don't add the team total to the user total.

Another thing to note is that the donor(user) download has nearly 3 million entries so you may need to custom prepare the data if you plan to import it into the like of excel for initial evaluation.
The team download is much smaller.

[Joe_H]

An additional thing to note is that some donors and teams have had their points zeroed out for violations of the terms of use for the folding software. From what I understand that is a very small number, but it has occurred a few times over the 20+ years of the F@h project.

[gunnarre]

19.4 trillion - https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com ... ary.php?s=

ExtremeOverclocking doesn't track teams and individuals until they reach a certain rank, but perhaps the total score is complete since it's based on that file instead of adding up the teams?

[vivatobst]

I find it interesting that according to EOC's page there are only around 27,000 active folders. Or am I reading that wrong?

• Aggregate User Info
  New 837 (+389 )
  Active 27,300 (+680 )
  Inactive 872,739
  Total 900,039

EOC shows 900k users in total, on the other hand the FAH stats show 2.9M total users

[gunnarre]

The reason is that

ExtremeOverclocking doesn't track teams and individuals until they reach a certain rank

https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/?nav=FAQ

Q: Why isn't my team's stats listed?
A: Due to sheer volume, and inactive teams, I only process teams with a rank of 12,000 or better. Teams are automatically added / removed at that cutoff point.

[aetch]

the FAH stats show 2.9M total users

It's misleading. It's 2.9million user/team combinations.
A user will be listed once for each team they have contributed to.
If a user has contributed to 4 teams (including default team 0) they will be listed 4 times in the stats.
However, EOC and FAH treat them differently.
EOC treats each user/team combination as a separate entity and ranks them separately.
https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/search.php
FAH lists the contribution to each team, aggregates the totals and ranks just the user.
https://stats.foldingathome.org/donor
Look up the user "ipkh" on both stats sites as an example.

You could also download the donor and team exports and do you own analysis on them.
https://foldingathome.org/statistics/?lng=en

[Neil-B]

... and 'active user' is near meaningless given the variety of ways folders use usernames/teams/passkey, the nature of their folding installations, how ofter they are rebuilt, etc. ... I for instance use numerous passkeys and usernames folding for one team utilising relatively stable installations ... I would appear as multiple active users (which I am not) ... some installations may even appear as a new active user for every wu completed ... this means that however anyone slices and dices the raw data any resultant estimates as to number of active users are simply that - estimates - and can vary significantly depending on the methodology and assumptions used to create them

[aetch]

Neil-B - I think you're confusing active CPUs with active users.

I know mid-late 2020 FAH had to adjust the CPU stats because too many people were spinning up one-time virtual machines and each showed as a fresh CPU, I don't think it affected user stats beyond contributing points.

[Neil-B]

Nope .. not confusing .. I know active cpus are as you say .. but pretty sure I saw patterns during the big surge in 3020 where username has been linked to vms being spun up and down not just the cpuid .. each vm appeared to have unique username for some reason - probably an artifact of how someone chose to set up their process

[aetch]

I didn't see the splurge of one-time usernames.
That said, they were one-time usernames, they occurred more than 90 days ago so can they really be considered as "active" users? I doubt it.

I don't know how EOC defines "active" user but they do seem to calculate average points earned over the period of a week.

Q: How do you calculate the averages?
A: A 24hr average is simply the past 7 days total divided by 7. I tried linear regression and other techniques but the numbers all came out so close it was not worth the extra processing or complexities in the code.

https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/?nav=FAQ

I would assume EOC counts a user as inactive when this average either reaches zero or has been at zero for a period of time.

[Neil-B]

I used it as an example of the many odd ways usernames/passkeys have been used in the past that make definition of and calculation of active users challenging ... is something that happened a year ago included in a definition of active user as within 90 of today then of course not ... as an example of things that can and have in the past made calculation of active users challenging then imo it is valid ... if you can categorically state that single use usernames no longer exist and won't in the future then I will readilly cede that they need not bd considered when looking at current active users today or in the future

[Neil-B]

Obviously if one simply defines active users as active usernames within a time period it does become much simpler .. but that may bear little relation to the number of actual engaged entities/people folding .. for me this is an individual centric dc project and the people folding are what count ... yes there are many contributing organisations but for me the power is in the people and a count of active users should relate to the number of people contributing which is why I believe it is a really hard thing to define/count