Talk:Folding@home

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Folding@home article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 90 days

Folding@home is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 1, 2012.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 6, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
January 11, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
August 17, 2010	Good article nominee	Not listed
April 7, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
May 29, 2012	Peer review	Reviewed
October 25, 2012	Featured article candidate	Promoted
January 23, 2020	Featured article review	Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

Biology Mid‑importance

	Biology portal Folding@home is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Molecular Biology: MCB / COMPBIO

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Computational Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Computing: Software Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Stanford University High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Stanford University, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Stanford University on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Stanford UniversityWikipedia:WikiProject Stanford UniversityTemplate:WikiProject Stanford UniversityStanford University articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spoken Wikipedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia articles

Is this article "written like an advertisement?"[edit]

I'm somewhat surprised to see this cleanup tag here, since this is a featured article. Does any part of this article need to be revised or rewritten? Jarble (talk) 16:46, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would say it should be cleaned up and rewritten. For one thing the article claims that F@H pioneered volunteer distributed computing, when Seti@Home was out long before F@H. Nabeel_co (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed the clean up tag. I think it is very well-written. Fangfufu (talk) 11:51, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Folding@Home is a pioneer? Seti@home started way before Folding@home.[edit]

"The project has pioneered" It didn't pioneer those things... It was notable, but projects like Seti@home, Electric Sheep, Distributed.net, and GIMPS all pre-dated Folding@home. It's true that the F@H client has probably taken advantage of more varied processor architectures than most projects, but they were far from the first for CPU or GPU distributed volunteer computing. This is so blatantly inaccurate, I'm surprised that it's on the second paragraph of a fairly popular Wikipedia article. Definitely needs correcting. Nabeel_co (talk) 20:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done I also think the sentence after it is questionable since it uses "paradigm shift" in a broader context than the source. Tonystewart14 (talk) 03:30, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Playstation3 has been deprecated as a supported client[edit]

Please edit the main page, dropping the PLAYSTATION 3 from the list of supported devices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.109.194.172 (talk) 03:16, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional article[edit]

This reads like a highly promotional article, written to advertise Folding@home. Readers should be alerted that the prediction of protein structure, the hard-nose test for Folding@home has already been solved by a Google group. The problem has been solved using artificial intelligence by DeepMind, a company owned by Google. DeepMind developed the predictive tool AlphaFold that incorporates Rosetta input among many others to make their most accurate predictions of protein structure. AlphaFold has successfully predicted the structures of more than 200 million proteins from approximately 1 million species, covering virtually the entire protein universe.^[1] TruchaForelle (talk) 22:44, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AlphaFold and Folding@Home solve different kind of question. While AlphaFold returns the picture of a folded protein in its most energetically stable conformation, Folding@home returns a video of the protein undergoing folding, traversing its energy landscape.

An example article explaining the difference is here:

https://foldingathome.org/2020/12/08/protein-folding-and-related-problems-remain-unsolved-despite-alphafolds-advance/?lng=en Fangfufu (talk) 11:53, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Callaway E (July 2022). "The entire protein universe: AI predicts shape of nearly every known protein". Nature. 608: 15–16. doi:10.1038/d41586-022-02083-2.

By March 25 it reached 768 petaFLOPS, or 1.5 x86 exaFLOPS[edit]

This sentence is wrong. 768 petaFLOPS are 0.768 exaFLOPS. Could we fix it? Pier4r (talk) 11:52, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Callaway E (July 2022). "The entire protein universe: AI predicts shape of nearly every known protein". Nature. 608: 15–16. doi:10.1038/d41586-022-02083-2.

[1]