Server and funding constraints:
BOINC infrastructure needs maintenance.

If funding is tight or there's no active grant that relies on BOINC computation, the system can sit idle.

Not a lot of.
One of the main carateristic of boinc infrastructure is cheap

---

Server and funding constraints:
BOINC infrastructure needs maintenance.

If funding is tight or there's no active grant that relies on BOINC computation, the system can sit idle.

Not a lot of.
One of the main carateristic of boinc infrastructure is cheap

But to take the human time to create the tasks and analyze the result outside of what they are already paid to do....i think that is where it is at. Why have so many biomed projects gone silent if it is so cheap?

But to take the human time to create the tasks and analyze the result outside of what they are already paid to do....i think that is where it is at.

I don't think that IPD has problem with money/grants..

Why have so many biomed projects gone silent if it is so cheap?

'cause, a lot of times, the team of these projects is made up of just one person :-P
A lot of "temporary" projects, for example, are done by students for their PHD
The projects with more that 2/3 people, are running for decades (Rosetta, Einstein, Milky, etc)

P.S. Also the maintenance of a cluster needs a lot of human effort...
P.P.S In my humble opinion, it's a question of will, of "believing" in the boinc infrastructure

---

To the Project Rosetta Team,

Subject: Inquiry Regarding the Current Status and Future of the Rosetta@home Project - Lack of Work Units (WUs)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to respectfully inquire about the current status of the Rosetta@home project, particularly concerning the significant and prolonged absence of new Work Units (WUs). We have observed a marked reduction in available WUs over the last few months, a development that has caused some wonder among those of us dedicated to providing computational resources.

This situation prompts a few points of puzzlement:

Has the necessity for the Rosetta computing model diminished?

Are there no longer students or staff actively contributing to or managing the project?

Or, indeed, has the Rosetta project perhaps been placed into a state of abeyance?

I personally maintain several high-priority computational assets specifically allocated and waiting to receive Rosetta WUs. In the interim, the processing gap is being filled by other, less significant distributed computing projects, which are being run at a low-priority setting.

We, the contributors who dedicate substantial CPU time to this valuable research, would be most grateful if some clarifying information could be provided. An update detailing the immediate future, as well as the long-term outlook for the Rosetta project, would be highly appreciated.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. We eagerly await your response.

Yours faithfully,

---

My respected Laird.

Thank youfor posting this comment. My concerns precisely.

---

First of all your wasting your time writing them.
They will not answer you.

Second, i asked the chatbots about this and it came back roughly as the AI is doing all the work we used to do for raw protein finding. It can do that faster and better than we can. What we get is whatever the team sends down in small batches to further refine that target to its best models. They take that data and work on it and if they get around to sending out the next target great. If not..well your out of luck.

Roestta is gong the way of a lot of other health projects, the AI can do the job better and at a lower cost than using us. Denis@home had a good first run. Then the other person on the team got busy with his masters and then it was summer break. Last I knew they were working on new models, but again communication is zero from the project.

Rosetta is not a high priority for Baker Lab now. So welcome to the new version. Plus...what work is released to us is gone in a few hours as there are more machines than there is work.

I gave up on Rosetta. I have been since the early years. But this is the new reality. You can leave your machine attached and hope you get some work and not do any other projects so you can grab the first tasks that come out or you just realize that the medical science aspect of BOINC outside of WCG and GPU grid (which are both having their issues is going away and that just leaves astronomy or physics or math as the main raw data crunching types that never run out of work.

Sorry to be negative, but I have seen the decline of Rosetta happen over the 4 years or so and I also tried writing the Baker lab. When the students quit posting about the work and Keith the IT guy quit posting and then the moderator left and then as the work started slowing down I suspected something was up and now you see it.

This is the harsh reality. Another person didn't like my analysis last year..but I have to say to him, I was right.

From Grok:

Rosetta@home, like many BOINC projects focused on scientific research (in this case, protein structure prediction and design), doesn't generate a continuous stream of work units (WUs) the way some projects do. Instead, it operates on a **batch-based model** tied to specific research campaigns or computational experiments. Here's a breakdown of why this leads to the pattern of small batches followed by weeks (or even months) of dry spells:

### Key Reasons for Intermittent Work Availability
1. **Targeted Research Batches**: The team at the Baker Lab releases WUs in large, focused sets designed for particular goals, such as virtual screening for drug discovery, peptide simulations, or modeling specific proteins. Once a batch is exhausted by volunteers worldwide, the servers go dry until the next one is prepared. This isn't a steady "production line" but rather episodic, driven by scientific priorities like new hypotheses, data analysis, or grant-funded initiatives.

2. **Preparation and Analysis Periods**: Between batches, the project team spends time:
- Analyzing results from the previous batch (e.g., identifying promising protein designs).
- Generating and validating the next set of WUs, which can involve complex setup on their end.
- Addressing technical updates or resource allocation.
This downtime is explicitly acknowledged on the project's homepage: "there may be periods of down time when no work is available." A 2020 news post elaborated that these gaps occur "while preparing for future large-scale batches of jobs and analyzing results."

3. **Current Status (as of late September 2025)**: The scheduler recently showed **0 total queued jobs** available, with only ongoing progress on existing tasks. However, a March 2025 announcement indicated plans to "launch more such jobs in the near future," suggesting a new batch could drop soon—though no firm timeline was given. Recent forum chatter (e.g., July and September 2025 posts) echoes user frustration over the lack of predictability, with questions like "Is there ANY predictability about when more Rosetta tasks might surface?" but no detailed admin responses in those snippets.

### Platform-Specific Notes
- Some dry spells may feel more acute on certain OSes. For instance, recent reports (September 2025) suggest Windows users are currently not receiving WUs, possibly due to a shift toward Linux-optimized or VirtualBox-based tasks. If you're on Windows, double-check your BOINC settings for VirtualBox support and ensure your work cache is low (e.g., 0.1 days) to avoid over-downloading during bursts.

### Tips to Manage the Droughts
- **Diversify Projects**: Attach to complementary BOINC projects like Folding@home (also protein-related) or World Community Grid for steady work during gaps.
- **Monitor Status**: Check the [Rosetta@home server status page](https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/server_status.php) daily for queued jobs spiking.
- **Forum Alerts**: The [Rosetta@home forums](https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_index.php) often light up when batches drop—subscribe to the "Cafe Rosetta" section for heads-up.

This model maximizes scientific impact but can be frustrating for crunchers. The project's value comes from those high-impact batches, so hang in there—the next one could yield breakthroughs in drug design or beyond! If this doesn't match your setup (e.g., individual errors vs. project-wide), share more log details for troubleshooting.

One other thing from Grok:

Recent & Upcoming Batch Details
From the project's news and forums (no updates since March 2025):

Past Batch Example (September 2025): A short "RosettaVS" batch for small-molecule virtual screening (drug candidate conformations). Focused on sampling novel molecules where AI like AlphaFold falls short. Completed quickly due to volunteer scale (~55,000 active hosts).
Planned Focus Areas (Teased in March 2025 Update):

RosettaVS Protocol: Large-scale docking for therapeutics (e.g., sampling 100k+ conformations per target). Tied to a recent Nature Communications paper on improved accuracy.
Peptide Simulations: Non-canonical amino acids and mixed-chirality designs for drug-like peptides. Volunteers run extensive sampling to validate structures.
Timeline: "Near future" relative to March—no ETA given, but forums speculate Q4 2025 based on Baker Lab grant cycles. No signs of launch yet.[/b]

I have been in the group for awhile. I wasn't getting anything for a long while Now everything is for SAVE ALL NORJAN. No clue what this is. Things come through for a bit then disappear for a couple of days then back. Long project for this site. Can we get any feedback on that this is for??

---

I have been in the group for awhile. I wasn't getting anything for a long while Now everything is for SAVE ALL NORJAN. No clue what this is. Things come through for a bit then disappear for a couple of days then back. Long project for this site. Can we get any feedback on that this is for??

Judging by the name of my tasks, betaTrCP appears be about Beta Transducin Repeat Containing Protein. As for getting some feedback from the project, don't hold your breath.

I have been in the group for awhile. I wasn't getting anything for a long while Now everything is for SAVE ALL NORJAN. No clue what this is. Things come through for a bit then disappear for a couple of days then back. Long project for this site. Can we get any feedback on that this is for??

I ran it through Co-Pilot AI and here is what it said:
Here’s what I can tell you based on the search results — and I’ll keep it clear and grounded in what’s actually known from Rosetta@home conventions.

🔍 What your task name indicates
Rosetta@home task names are notoriously cryptic, but they follow consistent patterns. Your task:
RosettaVS_SAVE_ALL_OUT_NOJRAN_betaTrCP
contains several recognizable components that match patterns discussed by Rosetta@home volunteers and developers.
🧩 Breaking down the components

RosettaVS Likely refers to Rosetta Virtual Screening — a workflow used to dock or evaluate many small molecules or protein variants.
SAVE_ALL_OUT Means the task is configured to save all output structures rather than only the best-scoring ones.
NOJRAN Indicates that no randomization of the job seed is used. This is sometimes done for reproducibility.
betaTrCP This is the biological target. β-TrCP (beta-transducin repeat-containing protein) is a well-known E3 ubiquitin ligase involved in protein degradation. Rosetta often screens binders or designs peptides for such targets.
IGNORE_THE_REST (seen in related tasks) Means only the most relevant output is uploaded; the rest is discarded to save disk space.

🧬 What kind of science this task is likely doing
The presence of RosettaVS + betaTrCP strongly suggests:
Virtual screening or docking against β‑TrCP
β‑TrCP is a common target in protein–protein interaction research, especially for:
- degrader design (e.g., PROTAC-like concepts)
- peptide binder design
- motif recognition studies
RosettaVS tasks typically generate many decoys (candidate structures), which explains the SAVE_ALL_OUT flag — the researchers want every structure for analysis.

🖥️ Example of a similar task
A nearly identical task name appears in the Rosetta@home database:
RosettaVS_SAVE_ALL_OUT_NOJRAN_betaTrCP_frame_1631_fulldb_IGNORE_THE_REST
This confirms that your task is part of the same batch.

🧠 Bottom line
Your task is almost certainly part of a virtual screening / docking experiment targeting β‑TrCP, with settings that:
- save all generated structures (SAVE_ALL_OUT)
- avoid random job seeding (NOJRAN)
- possibly use full database mode (seen in related tasks)
- may discard nonessential outputs (IGNORE_THE_REST in related units)
These are normal and intentional flags used by Rosetta researchers.

---