I appreciate that more thought, time, and energy goes into doing than science than goes into explaining it here. I chalked up some of the apparently random or inscrutable task names to the fact that people were working harder on the research than names or documentation.

Still some names like yournamehere_out_file_* or 8CHARACTER_UNIQUENAME_* don't engender feelings of confidence. I hope that more thought goes into creating the jobs and using the results.

Are the jobs open source? Is anyone here reviewing the jobs before or as they are sent out? It seems more meaningful names would be used for peer reviewers if for nobody else.

I appreciate that more thought, time, and energy goes into doing than science than goes into explaining it here. I chalked up some of the apparently random or inscrutable task names to the fact that people were working harder on the research than names or documentation.
Still some names like yournamehere_out_file_* or 8CHARACTER_UNIQUENAME_* don't engender feelings of confidence. I hope that more thought goes into creating the jobs and using the results.

See here

---

You mean like this https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=1182994311 yournamehere_out_file_0507_d1a75a_v6_4AS_pb_ASW0_TERM20_length45_0075_fragments_abinitio_SAVE_ALL_OUT_929961_1147_0
It appears to have Validated ok.
I was a bit concerned when I first saw the filename.

I can assure you that a lot of thought (and work) is behind every single job regardless of the job name and the results are used for important decisions that go on to the wet lab. Please do not abort jobs based on names since every job is important.

---