LHC@home

I\\\'m crunching T4T stuff as we speak but will this project ever restart albeit in a different form?

Rumor has it they will have to re-tune the LHC\\\'s magnets for the LHC\\\'s upgrade so there seems to be a good chance for more Sixtrack work units. I have a hunch that work will be handed over to whatever project T4T evolves into. Remember that the biggest problem with Sixtrack was that tasks from different OS\\\'s frequently would not verify against each other. That could easily be solved by running the Linux version of Sixtrack in a VirtualBox on Mac, Linux and Windows hosts. T4T is proving that approach works with the various apps they run so I can easily see where LHC@home might adopt the same methods. Even simpler would be to add Sixtrack to T4T\\\'s repertoire of applications and let T4T handle it. They\\\'re all set up for it whereas LHC@home is not. Just some speculation but it wouldn\\\'t surprise me at all.

Test4Theory has gone Beta!

Test4Theory (T4T) is a test project, to demonstrate the use of CERN-developed CernVM and BOINCVM systems to harness volunteer cloud computing power for full-fledged LHC event physics simulation on volunteer computers.

You can check it out HERE.

T4T makes use of the Oracle Virtual Machine to run BOINC Work Units.

Tom

Is LHC@Home ever going to get more work or will it all be farmed out to LHC+@Home?

The way I understand it, LHC++@home is developing an app that will eventually be used here on LHC@home. It seems to me LHC++@home is just for the purpose of alpha/beta testing that new app and it will never be a production project.

Also, I have read here that LHC@home will eventually be issuing work for the Sixtrack application which is currently being updated. So, at some point in the future, LHC@home may be issuing work for 2 applications: Sixtrack plus the new app LHC++@home is developing. There should be lots of work here at that time.

This project was created for the purpose of doing the computations required for tuning the magnets that focus the particle beam inside the collider tube. Now that the magnets are tuned this project has little to do until they decide to play with different particles which will require retuning the magnets.

I have trained myself downloading VirtualBox and using Open Solaris as a guest OS. I downloaded a BOINC client 6.2.19 by a developer called Dotsch and a SETI@home 6.03 app also by Dotsch. SETI@home was the only BOINC client and app I could find running on Solaris Espress (SunOS 5.11). So I made some practice on VirtualBox, sometimes upgrading it and going back to an earlier version when the newer would not work. But it is a good software and has also message boards where you can post and receive suggestions, Solaris comes from Berkeley UNIX, which I have used in my career. But it used to cost money, contrarily to Linux. Now it is free.
Tullio

This forum is not for the project. However, as the site has been down (temporarily or permanently), did anyone around know whether the project had been abandoned (and why so quickly) or is there plan to resurrect it? Anywhere on the Internet could we get more information?

LHC+@Home has become LHC++@Home and has a new test site
http://boinc01.cern.ch/test4theory/

Only a handful of testers for alpha testing and currently not accepting new users. Anyway, the new site has its own forum.

Upgrade of the server code is on the to-do list and will be implemented soon.

That should kill a few things not just the spurious characters.

It\\\'s a bug in the (unreleased alpha) server software they\\\'re using. It should be gone as soon as they update to a newer version.

Any clue if there will be more WU\\\\\\\'s approaching?

Hi,
my account was set up to be a member of the \\\"Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science\\\" team. But when I logged in today my account was not associated with any team, and when I did a team search I could not find a \\\"Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science\\\" team.

Anybody know what is going on?

I have the same issue with Einstein@home as well.

Cheers,
Paul

There may be other issues though.

18070395 Success Done 1,123.02 4.20 pending
18070396 Success Done 7.54 0.02 pending

There\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s a big difference in computing time.

If I remember rightly the difference is normal for these WUs. For the beam integrity computations we were doing before (and I assume it\\\\\\\'s something similar we\\\\\\\'ll be doing again) the short runs indicate scenarios where the beam strikes the wall almost immediately and the longer WUs indicate complete (or nearly complete) turns.
Both are valuable from the modelling standpoint. :)
HTH & HIR. :)

There\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s a big difference in computing time.

If I remember rightly the difference is normal for these WUs. For the beam integrity computations we were doing before (and I assume it\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s something similar we\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'ll