Closed mariosky closed 8 years ago
Some highlights that can be mentioned in the abstract: "this paper presents one of the few experiments that uses computational resources that are as dissimilar as smartphones and powerful laptops or desktop computers in a research center."
We have to make the reviewers understand that our system is not intended to be run in a HPC system, but in any platform (mobile, laptops, desktops) using any SO, and without the need of installing software, having knowledge about the problems or the metaheuristics, etc.
The problem is that in the paper, there are some statements about a minimum performance required in order to be an useful system.
But yours is a valid point, that needs to be clearly stated in the paper as an objective.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Pedro A. Castillo Valdivieso < notifications@github.com> wrote:
We have to make the reviewers understand that our system is not intended to be run in a HPC system, but in any platform (mobile, laptops, desktops) using any SO, and without the need of installing software, having knowledge about the problems or the metaheuristics, etc.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/JJ/modeling-volunteer-computing/issues/33#issuecomment-150900681 .
The paper abstract does not properly summarize the paper contents. It says that “That is why in this paper we present NodIO, a client-server architecture for distributed evolutionary algorithms !”, but there are two versions of the architecture, as stated later in the conclusions: “In this paper two versions of a client-server architecture for volunteer and distributed evolutionary !”. That second version is neither commented in the introduction.