Taking a look at the scientific publications, it appeared to me that, since a while, the Rosetta@home distributed computing community is no longer acknowledged in the papers.

Did I overlook something here?

Michael.

---

President of Rechenkraft.net e.V.

http://www.rechenkraft.net - The world's first and largest distributed computing association. We make those things possible that supercomputers don't.

Did I overlook something here?

bakerlab

---

I just had a quick look- rosetta@home is mentioned under "Acknowledgements" on the most recent paper:

...and Rosetta@Home volunteers for computing resources used in ab initio structure prediction calculations.

---

It's mentioned in both papers published this year so far:
"We also thank Rosetta@home and Charity engine participants for donating their computer time."

Rosetta@home should be in all the acknowledgements where used, unless we made an error :(

OK. Good to hear that, at least in 2017, this practice of properly acknowledging scientific contributions has been resumed.

To the best of my knowledge, according to international science journal standards, any publication which does not acknowledge the Rosetta@home DC community although results from that community's efforts were used for that particular scientific work, would require the writing of an appropriate corrigendum.

David Bakers Rosetta@home undoubtedly is one of the top-notch DC projects in the world. Therefore, it serves a key example for what is possible with scientific computing on a volunteer community basis. If that community is not mentioned, however, nobody will ever know about its wonderful possibilities and interest might soon fade away.

Michael.

---

President of Rechenkraft.net e.V.

http://www.rechenkraft.net - The world's first and largest distributed computing association. We make those things possible that supercomputers don't.

R@h has been mentioned in all of the papers I've seen from BakerLab for many years.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Keep in mind that research is also published out of the Baker lab that does not use Rosetta@home computing due to the nature of the calculations. For example, large proteins and multi-chain complexes may require too much memory, some protocols are not as computationally intense and thus can be run on local machines, and some protocols require intercommunication between parallel jobs (using MPI) which cannot be run on Rosetta@home but can be run on local machines and supercomputing centers.

Do you have a particular paper in mind? I just tried clicking through a couple random papers that used Rosetta@home and Rosetta@home is mentioned.

OK. Good to hear that, at least in 2017, this practice of properly acknowledging scientific contributions has been resumed.

To the best of my knowledge, according to international science journal standards, any publication which does not acknowledge the Rosetta@home DC community although results from that community's efforts were used for that particular scientific work, would require the writing of an appropriate corrigendum.

David Bakers Rosetta@home undoubtedly is one of the top-notch DC projects in the world. Therefore, it serves a key example for what is possible with scientific computing on a volunteer community basis. If that community is not mentioned, however, nobody will ever know about its wonderful possibilities and interest might soon fade away.

Michael.