| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Vote for December POTM from choices below: |
| ABC -Rank 26 - Stomp Medium - 1.32 X LC |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| Docking -Rank 13 - Stomp Medium - 1.58 X LC |
|
23% |
[ 3 ] |
| Einstein -Rank 17 - Stomp Low - 1.58 X LC |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Malaria Control -Rank 14 - Stomp High - 1.08 X LC |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| NFS (Non vault) - Rank 14 - Stomp High - 2.48 X LC |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| POEM - Rank 18 - Stomp Low - 1.51 X LC |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Prime Grid -Rank 29 - Stomp Low - 1.79 X LC |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| Quantum M. Carlo -Rank 44 - Stomp High - 1.94 X LC |
|
38% |
[ 5 ] |
| Rectilinear Cross. -Rank 27 - Stomp High - 1.17 X LC |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Rosetta -Rank 18 - Stomp Zero - 1.04 X LC |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| Spinhenge -Rank 11 - Stomp Zero - 1.23 X LC |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Sztaki - Rank 10 - Stomp Medium - ? X LC |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| VACATION - No POTM in December |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| World Grid -Rank 105 - Stomp High - 1.01 X LC |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Yoyo -Rank 14 - Stomp Low - 2.12 X LC |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 13 |
|
| Author |
Message |
LanDroid
Prince
Joined: 11 Jun 2002
Posts: 4476
Location: Cincinnati, OH U.S.
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:00 pm Post subject: VOTE: Project Of The Month - December |
 |
|
Please vote for the project that you prefer for Project of The Month from the list above. The concept is KWSN members should allocate as many crunching assets to that project as feasible during the month of December.
Note several new ballot features this month: a new statistic, inclusion of a non-vault project, and the option to skip POTM in December.
New statistic: "X LC"
This indicates how many points your computer should earn relative to last month's POTM, Leiden Classical. For example 1.50 means the project should earn 50% more points than Leiden Classical given the same computing power. Thanks stooper101!
Stomp Factor
My subjective rating of the number of teams we could stomp during the month. Perhaps Al Dente will also post his flowchart showing more detailed stomp factor data.
Zero = We're solid, but probably can't move up.
Low = We might move up 1 or 2 places with some luck.
Medium = We could move up say 3 to 5 places.
High = We should stomp a bunch of teams on this project!
_________________
[img]http://stats.free-dc.org/cpidtagb.php?cpid=6533a276b3a1dde393be350eb3cfda70&theme=16&cols=5/.png[/img]
[img]http://stats.free-dc.org/badgesbanner.php?cpid=6533a276b3a1dde393be350eb3cfda70/.png[/img] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Idan
UN-Smitten
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 2993
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
I chose QMC... just coz it's too loonie to be real science... Quantum stuff... psh... I'm sure we'll get to the moon soon... 
_________________
Anyone for Crunch?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ohiomike
Prince
Joined: 20 May 2007
Posts: 858
Location: Sometimes
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Idan wrote: | | I chose QMC... just coz it's too loonie to be real science... Quantum stuff... psh... I'm sure we'll get to the moon soon... |
Whats not to love (From Wikipedia):
Quantum chemistry is a branch of theoretical chemistry, which applies quantum mechanics and quantum field theory to address problems in chemistry. The description of the electronic behavior of atoms and molecules as pertaining to their reactivity is one of the applications of quantum chemistry. Quantum chemistry lies on the border between chemistry and physics, and significant contributions have been made by scientists from both fields. It has a strong and active overlap with the field of atomic physics and molecular physics, as well as physical chemistry.
Quantum chemistry mathematically describes the fundamental behavior of matter at the molecular scale.[1] It is, in principle, possible to describe all chemical systems using this theory. In practice, only the simplest chemical systems may realistically be investigated in purely quantum mechanical terms, and approximations must be made for most practical purposes (e.g., Hartree-Fock, post Hartree-Fock or Density functional theory, see computational chemistry for more details). Hence a detailed understanding of quantum mechanics is not necessary for most chemistry, as the important implications of the theory (principally the orbital approximation) can be understood and applied in simpler terms.
In quantum mechanics the Hamiltonian, or the physical state, of a particle can be expressed as the sum of two operators, one corresponding to kinetic energy and the other to potential energy. The Hamiltonian in the Schrödinger wave equation used in quantum chemistry does not contain terms for the spin of the electron.
Solutions of the Schrödinger equation for the hydrogen atom gives the form of the wave function for atomic orbitals, and the relative energy of the various orbitals. The orbital approximation can be used to understand the other atoms e.g. helium, lithium and carbon.
....
_________________
 
Resident Linux fan and credit ho >My Shrubbers<
Proud member of the "Fry a CPU for breakfast club" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Idan
UN-Smitten
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 2993
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nice explanation mike...
And I thought Schrödinger was a cat... 
_________________
Anyone for Crunch?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nuadormrac
Prince
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Posts: 506
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, looking at the science, QMC would definitely be more inteteresting; though just from a RAC perspective I had voted for NFS. It's got a higher credit allocation, and is among those with a high stomp factor.
But all I can say is that after a low credit yielding POTM (and that's when the WU's didn't have problems); yes it's being a credit ho to make up for prior losses. It's more making up lost credits then anything wrt what it's actually doing.
_________________
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stooper101
Prince
Joined: 16 May 2009
Posts: 1248
Location: Cheese Country
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For me, it was between QMC and NFS (yes, it was prob. the lil' credit ho inside). But I always seem to go more for physical science over math. That being said, I think NFS has a good opportunity to gain places (and credit) before it gets into the vault and like Yankton said in the other thread, it looks like NFS will get in soon. So, I voted for QMC with eyes for NFS.
_________________
>stats< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Killerrabbit
Major Oblivion
Joined: 23 May 2002
Posts: 4656
Location: in a rabbit hole near you!!
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Either the cat is dead or alive, at the same time.
Ni
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Idan
UN-Smitten
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 2993
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2009 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Either the cat is dead or alive, at the same time. |
Or he's dead AND alive in the same time?
You see? That's just too loonie!
This project is POTM and not POTM in the same time existence!
omg!
 while in the same time 
_________________
Anyone for Crunch?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LanDroid
Prince
Joined: 11 Jun 2002
Posts: 4476
Location: Cincinnati, OH U.S.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Post your votes - will probably close this tomorrow evening... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Idan
UN-Smitten
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 2993
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
I voted QMC... Quantum is waaay too loonie for us not to crunch...
_________________
Anyone for Crunch?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
