I thought this was interesting. It is from the project forum posted by the project leader:
The Rosetta@home project goals are very different from those of Folding@home. The goal of Folding@home, I believe, is to determine how long proteins take to fold, given the sequence of the protein and knowledge of its three dimensional structure. The goal of Rosetta@home is to predict the three dimensional structure from the amino acid sequence. As explained in the Daily Telegraph article and the press releases, Rosetta has been the best method for structure prediction for quite some time (WIRED magazine had a nice article as well: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.07/blue.html?pg=1.
Although the growth of the project over the last week has been amazing, our efforts to predict protein structures are still limited by total computing power. Does anybody have suggestions on how to recruit more participants?
thanks,
David
The Rosetta@home project goals are very different from those of Folding@home. The goal of Folding@home, I believe, is to determine how long proteins take to fold, given the sequence of the protein and knowledge of its three dimensional structure. The goal of Rosetta@home is to predict the three dimensional structure from the amino acid sequence. As explained in the Daily Telegraph article and the press releases, Rosetta has been the best method for structure prediction for quite some time (WIRED magazine had a nice article as well: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.07/blue.html?pg=1.
Although the growth of the project over the last week has been amazing, our efforts to predict protein structures are still limited by total computing power. Does anybody have suggestions on how to recruit more participants?
thanks,
David
