I've been in communications with an Administrator at Free-DC. I ask if it would be possible to include the Results Returned and Total Run Time like they do the Total Credit in there web pages, example http://stats.free-dc.org/stats.php?p...=eah&team=6105. I was informed that that information was not included in the Projects exported files. He also agreed that such a modification to the exported files would be the authority of BOINC.

I told him that data such as Results Returned and Total Run Time would be a useful tool in encouraging new members to join a crunching recruitment effort. That while there are many who are encouraged by credits/points, there are some who value results as a more encouraging indicator of work accomplished. Total Run Time would take the quality of hardware out of the picture, so some bloke running crappy equipment can still get respect for shrubbing 3 months or a year on a project.

His opinion was that such an inclusion of data should not be that difficult to implement. Since WCG provides that info for its team members, why not include it for other Project's data. http://i702.photobucket.com/albums/ww27/Gandalf_PCHF/TotalResults_zps6bd99ecb.png

Can BOINC be persuaded to implement this modification? For this purpose, I am posting this thread.

Respectively,
Gandalf_the_Grey

---

Well, I do have some questions on that:
1. What do you want done with the results already previously run?

2. You do know that BOINC did away with those things and came up with the credit system, due to the 'tasks run' being incompatible between projects? (You can't compare a Seti task with a CPDN model, for instance)

3. You do also know that this isn't just a decision the BOINC developers can make, but that projects have to be in it as well, as they do not count any such statistics at the moment, and therefore should make changes to their database(s) (something some projects will not like doing, as adding a column for several hundreds of thousands of computers adds to overhead) to be able to do so?

I have forwarded your question to David Anderson.

---

Simply put, WCG is the only project that will likely have maintained time and result count stats from day one... an unfair ground is created when stats would start on those measures if done from whatever other day than the original starting point. The different sizes of results of course offering biggest distortion.

BTW, the credit disparity is still so big, which project does actually use an unrigged system, without exceptions, standard out of the box, that even credit per second comparisons is a fools effort, but that's just my opinion (Read of one project giving adjusted credit for ivy/sandy devices as an example)

---

Coelum Non Animum Mutant, Qui Trans Mare Currunt

Simply put, WCG is the only project that will likely have maintained time and result count stats from day one... an unfair ground is created when stats would start on those measures if done from whatever other day than the original starting point. The different sizes of results of course offering biggest distortion.

BTW, the credit disparity is still so big, which project does actually use an unrigged system, without exceptions, standard out of the box, that even credit per second comparisons is a fools effort, but that's just my opinion (Read of one project giving adjusted credit for ivy/sandy devices as an example)

I am not looking to compare one project to another, but one member of a team to another member on the same team within a Project. As for starting in the middle, I have started crunching for a new team on a different Project and have produced a Status Report for a week. I did this by starting with the Team's individual member's Total Credits on Sunday, then recorded the Total Credits on the following Saturday. The difference is the Gain per member over the week.
Example: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?285995-XS-Seti-Home-Team-Stat-Report-04.28.2013

Including the requested data will improve the presentation and go a long way to bring in more members as they present themselves.

---

Well, I do have some questions on that:
1. What do you want done with the results already previously run?

2. You do know that BOINC did away with those things and came up with the credit system, due to the 'tasks run' being incompatible between projects? (You can't compare a Seti task with a CPDN model, for instance)

3. You do also know that this isn't just a decision the BOINC developers can make, but that projects have to be in it as well, as they do not count any such statistics at the moment, and therefore should make changes to their database(s) (something some projects will not like doing, as adding a column for several hundreds of thousands of computers adds to overhead) to be able to do so?

I have forwarded your question to David Anderson.

1. I think my last post showed a link that shows how the Total Credits are presented. The Results Received will be presented in following columns along with their Total Run Time data.

2. Since my intent is not to compare one Project's data with another, Apples are Apples and Oranges or Oranges.

3. Since WCG is presenting this data for it's Team members, I can assume that this idea is technically doable. As for the acceptance of Projects to agree with collecting and Exporting the data, I can only push this idea up hill so far. Eventually, one has to reach the top of any hill, then gravity and the foresight of good men must take over.

I trust I have answered your questions.

Gandalf

P.S. - A truism comes to mind. "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." I am not attempting to present this idea for personal gain other than knowing that it might deliver some satisfaction to my fellow crunchers. The knowledge that my 22,000 Results Returned this week might just provide a cure. Come to think of it, yes, I do have a personal gain.

---