I know BOINC credits don't buy anything, but it would be nice if Rosetta granted a similar ammount per hour to some of my other projects.

A recent task https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=185984259 had a particularly low credit grant.

You can see my other recent tasks at https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/results.php?userid=150379.

I very rarely get more credit than claimed, but < 10% is probably an all time low!

Keith

---

there is a thread somewhere here in number crunching about such things as comparing rosie's credit vs seti or others. if i remember correctly, RAH has its own credit style that does not compare with such projects as Seti and WCG or others. maybe someone can dig up that post for you.

I know BOINC credits don't buy anything, but it would be nice if Rosetta granted a similar ammount per hour to some of my other projects.

A recent task https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=185984259 had a particularly low credit grant.

You can see my other recent tasks at https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/results.php?userid=150379.

I very rarely get more credit than claimed, but < 10% is probably an all time low!

Keith

This project does seem to grant a bit low, but within 10% of the average. However if what I remember of how credit works here is correct, it is the other projects that need to make adjustments. This project takes the average of what is claimed per model for each type of task then grants it per model. The first few tasks returned of a given type can vary widely but after a few thousand are returned it is probably closer to what the credit should be than any other project.

---

BOINC WIKI

BOINCing since 2002/12/8

I think the very low grant:

Claimed credit 73.5154984583426
Granted credit 7.2629585763699

may have been due to exceptional factors. I had a Trojan program (now cleaned) running as well as BOINC , but I have noticed that other recent grants have also been low.

I like to support Rosetta because of the useful work that it does, but I suspect that my hardware, AMD Athlon 2200+ with 768MB physical RAM is now on the low end of the scale compared to some of the "big boys".

It also seems to have got worse since MiniRosetta, I noticed that there is already discussion of low credit grants in the Minirosetta v1.32 bug thread

Keith.

well there is this sticky about the point system
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2194

i cant say im happy with it, i mean if my atom box took 4 days to do a wu FOR fah. I got the points they assigned to that WU, i do see R@H to be the same as F@H. they both work on protien folding i just dont get why different sytle of giving points.

the reason why i dont like it cause of this...
45,693.77<-- time taken 54.27<-claimed 18.97<-- granted
even when i ran lattice i didnt have this issue with the point system. they simply avaraged the 2 points of the wu's. as they assigned lower points to wu sent to a linux box vs windows.

maybe im the only one that has a issue with the point system. i read that thread about the mini-rose, that just doesnt seem right either...

Evilsizer, the credit system compensates for your time spent, because you will have completed more models. And rather then waste the machine power of having two machines do the same task, just to get credit straight, Rosetta averages all of the related (but unique) tasks and grants you credit based on that.

But there does seem to be a problem with credit of late. DK agreed to look in to it. But change or correction will not be immediate.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Evilsizer, the credit system compensates for your time spent, because you will have completed more models. And rather then waste the machine power of having two machines do the same task, just to get credit straight, Rosetta averages all of the related (but unique) tasks and grants you credit based on that.

But there does seem to be a problem with credit of late. DK agreed to look in to it. But change or correction will not be immediate.

I have also found a very low granted to credit ratio.

I had a small farm of Q6600 based systems available, and these all consistently got very low granted ratios for most WU's (around 10%). Suffice to say, these systems no longer process Rosetta WU's, which is a shame.

---

This is ridiculous. claimed credit: 50.12, granted credit: 9.96.

If this keeps up i'm gone.

could you post the link to that work unit, there might be a bug or something else wrong with it.

This is ridiculous. claimed credit: 50.12, granted credit: 9.96.

If this keeps up i'm gone.

Here's the link: https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=189240710

could you post the link to that work unit, there might be a bug or something else wrong with it.

This is ridiculous. claimed credit: 50.12, granted credit: 9.96.

If this keeps up i'm gone.

looks normal, it ran up against your run time preferences to complete one decoy and gave its normal bug message about psp. I can't say why the credit is so low, unless it has to do with run time. To get a more accurate answer why you got so low of credit, why don't you repost your question with the link in the mini 1.32 thread.

also, can you unhide your computer(s) so that the experts can see what kind of system you have, or at least put in your new post what kind of system and OS you have.

Here's the link: https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=189240710

could you post the link to that work unit, there might be a bug or something else wrong with it.

This is ridiculous. claimed credit: 50.12, granted credit: 9.96.

If this keeps up i'm gone.