1 / 19

Retaining Participants in Volunteer Computing Projects

Retaining Participants in Volunteer Computing Projects. Peter Darch, Annamaria Carusi Oxford e-Research Centre, University of Oxford 8 December 2009 peter.darch@ccc.ox.ac.uk. Introduction. Volunteer computing projects

dard
Télécharger la présentation

Retaining Participants in Volunteer Computing Projects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Retaining Participants in Volunteer Computing Projects Peter Darch, Annamaria Carusi Oxford e-Research Centre, University of Oxford 8 December 2009 peter.darch@ccc.ox.ac.uk

  2. Introduction • Volunteer computing projects • Explosion of scientific projects requiring large-scale computing capacity (Welsh et al. 2006) • Drive for greater public engagement on the part of scientists • VCPs since 1996 • In a variety of scientific fields

  3. Goals of Volunteer Computing Projects • To do science • e.g. BRaTS@Home • To educate and engage the public • e.g. climateprediction.net; Rosetta@home • To achieve these, they need to recruit and retain volunteers

  4. Set up in 1999, in order to study uncertainty in climate models • Became volunteer computing project, September 2003 • With the support of UK e-Science (EPSRC), now ‘by far the largest full-resolution climate modelling experiment in the world‘ (Martin et al. 2005, p. 2) • ~57 000 active users

  5. A ‘work unit’ • A single climate model (1920-2080) • Online forums • Feedback from the project • ‘Credits’ • Volunteers form teams, often with own web pages and forums • League tables on climateprediction.net’s website • Screensaver showing progress of the model • Visualization

  6. http://attribution.cpdn.org/images/cloudshot_win0.gif (accessed 17 November 2008)

  7. Two overriding (inter-related) aims: • To produce scientific results • Results published in scientific journals, including Nature (e.g. Stainforth et al. (2005) has been cited 375 times) • To educate the public about climate science • Materials on project website • Talks in schools, universities • Also seeks to be ongoing • New projects developed

  8. The case study • Data collected: • climateprediction.net online forums • Semi-structured interviews with software engineers and scientists involed in developing and running the project • Online questionnaires for project volunteers • Papers published by technoscientists

  9. Retaining project volunteers • Different groups of project volunteers: • “Super-crunchers” • Those who do a great deal of work for the project • Those with little prior familiarity with scientific institutions • “Alpha-testers” • Those who test the new models and work units • These groups valuable to climateprediction.net in different ways • And have different motivations for taking part

  10. The “super-crunchers” • Enjoy the prestige of doing a great deal of scientific work • Post on forums about how much they’ve done • Posts when milestones reached • Signatures in forum posts: • Signatures

  11. The “super-crunchers” • Do a great deal of work for the project • ~10% of credit awarded to ~0.2% of active volunteers • ~60% of credits awarded to ~10% of volunteers • How they are retained: • Forums and teams • And credit system • Stability • Consistency

  12. Those with few links to scientific institutions • Very important group from point of view of public outreach • No other apparent links to technoscientific institutions • Relatively low credit scores • Participate in only a handful of other BOINC projects, if at all • ~75% of volunteers; but <25% of credits assigned to them

  13. Those with few links to scientific institutions • Generally believed by those launching VCPs that they are interested in: • Visualizations • Being educated about the science behind the VCP • More interested • Being reassured that they are making a contribution • Cumulative credit system • Regular feedback about scientific results

  14. The “alpha-testers” • Important contribution to the ongoing nature of the project • Test new models and work units • 15, 20, 30 or more BOINC projects • So may not be available for testing

  15. The “alpha-testers” • Little trust in the other volunteers • Belief that these volunteers know little about science • Instead, belief that volunteers are motivated primarily by credit system • Need credit system with consistent/inflexible rules

  16. Conclusions • Goals of running a VCP • To do science • To engage/educate the public • Decisions to be made • Ongoing vs one-off • What to offer the volunteers • Educational material • Visualizations • Policies regarding systems of credit

  17. Conclusions • Different groups of volunteers • “Super-crunchers” • Those with little prior engagement with science • “Alpha-testers” • Contribution towards different goals • Different ways of engaging and retaining them • All motivated by the belief that the project produces worthwhile science

  18. Acknowledgments • Particular thanks to: • Milo Thurston & Tolu Aina, who work on running and maintaining climateprediction.net, for their time and for cyber-introductions to climateprediction.net volunteers • mo.v and Thyme Lawn, two climateprediction.net forum moderators, for advice on how to approach their online community and for promoting my project on the climateprediction.net forums • The many climateprediction.net volunteers

  19. References • Martin, A., Aina, T., Christensen, C., Kettleborough, J. & Stainforth, D. (2005) ‘On two kinds of public-resource distributed computing’, Prodceedings of Fourth UK e-Science All-Hands Meeting. • Stainforth, D., Aina, T., Christensen, C., Collins, M., Faull, N., Frame, D., Kettleborough, J., Knight, S., Martin, A., Murphy, J., Piani, C., Sexton, D., Smith, L., Spicer, R., Thorpe, A. & Allen, M.. (2005). ‘Uncertainty in predictions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases.’ Nature, vol. 433, pp. 404-406. • Welsh, E., Jirotka, M. & Gavaghan, D. (2006) ‘Post-genomic science: cross-disciplinary and large-scale collaborative research and its organizational and technological challenges for the scientific research process’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, vol. 364, no. 1843, pp. 1533-1549.

More Related