movie scan basics and purpose...simplify, please...

Archived here are older posts which are no longer relevant or were redundant.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Locked
polarisys
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:04 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

movie scan basics and purpose...simplify, please...

Post by polarisys » Tue Oct 10, 2006 10:33 pm

I'd some rather hardtime to get into forum, as it (the system) seem to take sometime to send a confirmation reply... (almost 3 or 4 days). In your FAQs you don't specify the email address of 'administrator', for any login problems. I thought, I was locked out completely. But. any way, I'm now here...what I'd like to post?

I see some frustration of getting the scan done. I see also on this forum board. As Principal Investigator, said of the scan task -- "is to have fun, if not, you're not doing it right!"!! I think to make this fun and educative, and efficient (beneficial) is -- to be able to go back to the CMs and there it must actually disclose (by actually pointing it out) what was found in the scan. Thus, one could play it again and again, a few times at least, to really assimilate what it is that we see and looking for. This could be then something to 'look for' and learn. But, now, except for a change (surprise) of score, there is no way to understand how my input was received by the system. I think it should be more interactive, to be learning new, at the same time productive, efficient, and helpful. Why the rush of "mad" competition, by mere lottery mentality approach? I guess thats' one kind of fun...too. But, I think those who would like to have "fun" by learning to be efficient and helpful, rather than by playing poker or lottery. I do not so much care about the scoring, as I'll trust the brain of the group to be fair. This will separate all those who are into 'play games' to increase their 'score'.

Also, my second question is can there be more than one dust track in one scan? If so, at present it doesn't allow that multiple tracks input, how so?

-polaris
Polaris Consulting and Engineering Services
=System Engg, Reliability, System Integration, Robotics.

DustBuster
DustMod
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:12 pm
Location: Horsetown, USA

Post by DustBuster » Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:51 am

Hi polaris.

I'm not quite sure what your first question was.
As for multiple tracks in a single movie, you should indicate the most obvious or biggest track; when the movie is reviewed, the StarDust@Home team member will be able to determine if there is more than one candidate.
The expected number of tracks is around 45 for the entire collector- so multiple tracks, while possible, are highly unlikely.

I hope that helps.

katkolling
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 2:10 pm

Post by katkolling » Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:53 am

I think he was expressing frustration that we cannot review calibration movies except if we are lucky enough to be able to still backup, and even then there is no indication of where the track was.

As I have gotten more experienced I am now missing no (knock on wood) calibration movies, but I believe this is because I wait for both progress bars to complete before looking. Originally I think the fake tracks were simply not visible, because they hadn't loaded yet, even if the first bar was complete.

So wanting to review will get less impotant as a user's time goes on.

I do still think that 1/3 of the movies being calibration movies is excessive once a user gets past the first 100 movies or so. That starts to add up to a lot of non-prouctive time.

polarisys
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:04 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by polarisys » Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:26 am

DustBuster wrote:Hi polaris.

I'm not quite sure what your first question was.
What do you expect me to say? more? ... more words? for what?
?
DustBuster wrote: As for multiple tracks in a single movie, you should indicate the most obvious or biggest track; when the movie is reviewed, the StarDust@Home team member will be able to determine if there is more than one candidate.
The expected number of tracks is around 45 for the entire collector- so multiple tracks, while possible, are highly unlikely.
How're you so sure of the 45 number? I don't know if the Dr. Westphal, the Principal Investigator of Stardust has ever mentioned such a miniscule number any where?

If so, i.e., even if you're approximately right, just one order of magnitude of a mere, few tens -- then it seems to me why is there a need for such public help participation?? The official team itself should be able to find them easily, within a reasonable amount of time, else it seems is just a waste. Probably this explains the mentality of people participating in this seem only for some recognition or grand standing! And pre-occupied by CMs and scoring rather than being a 'real' need of help.
-polaris-
Polaris Consulting and Engineering Services
=System Engg, Reliability, System Integration, Robotics.

DustBuster
DustMod
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:12 pm
Location: Horsetown, USA

Post by DustBuster » Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:33 pm

polarisys wrote:
DustBuster wrote:Hi polaris.

I'm not quite sure what your first question was.
What do you expect me to say? more? ... more words? for what?
?
I see now that your first statement was a suggestion, not a question.

How're you so sure of the 45 number? I don't know if the Dr. Westphal, the Principal Investigator of Stardust has ever mentioned such a miniscule number any where?
Here is one reference (there are many more elsewhere)

If so, i.e., even if you're approximately right, just one order of magnitude of a mere, few tens -- then it seems to me why is there a need for such public help participation?? The official team itself should be able to find them easily, within a reasonable amount of time, else it seems is just a waste. Probably this explains the mentality of people participating in this seem only for some recognition or grand standing! And pre-occupied by CMs and scoring rather than being a 'real' need of help.
-polaris-
There are hundreds of thousands of focus movies to be reviewed and only six StarDust@Home team members. (read the remainder of the page linked above).

Happy searching!!!

Wolter
DustMod
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 2:23 am
Location: Enkhuizen, the Netherlands

Post by Wolter » Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:34 pm

polarisys wrote:
DustBuster wrote:Hi polaris.

I'm not quite sure what your first question was.
What do you expect me to say? more? ... more words? for what?
?
<...>
Well in your first post the part before your second question just seem to be a complaint about not being able to recall your CM's. Their is no clear cut question there.

As for reviewing your CM's yes the only way is to keep an eye on your score and when you miss one go back and review it once more.
Most of the volunteers who come to this forum have learned it that way and report that their skills have improved over time.
Where a CM does not make any sence to you you can either post the CM number in the appropiate thread or make a screen shot of first and last layer and post it here for support. Their are many volunteer willing to help you understand the movies.

The number of actual tracks expected is indeed very low. The number of movies to search through not 600.000 plus. This info is available both on the StardustAtHome site as well as on stardust.jpl.nasa.gov

Just post your questions here and we will try to help you.

[edit] i see that DustBuster just beat me to it... [/edit]
Just dusting... Image

polarisys
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:04 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by polarisys » Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:26 am

All the advice I've seen here amounts to -- "just ignore it (CM) and continue on...you will do better, eventually". So, it seems superfluous, except it is feeding the frenzy of some excitement of scoring. You'd have "improved" anyway, regardless of CMs, by the sheer volume of scan you do.

The idea of throwing a Calibration Movie randomly meant to help you "gain understanding" of what a real track is, seems just an illusion. At best a distraction. I don't know the idea of throwing someone "off balance" randomly, is a good way to make learn someone anything. I just fail to understand the sanity or the rationale behind such a silly thing.

Thanks anyway.
Polaris Consulting and Engineering Services
=System Engg, Reliability, System Integration, Robotics.

Wolter
DustMod
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 2:23 am
Location: Enkhuizen, the Netherlands

Post by Wolter » Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:11 pm

IMHO, the suggestions say: when misinterpretting a CM, go back and study it again.

Most of the time you will find what you (might) have missed.
If not post your question about it on the forum with a view screen shots of the CM in question and a lot of people are willing to help you.

But as i said that's just my opinion.
Just dusting... Image

polarisys
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:04 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by polarisys » Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:51 pm

Wolter wrote:IMHO, the suggestions say: when misinterpretting a CM, go back and study it again. .
Wolter, The DustMod -- IMHO?
Take a look at Q5 in the STICKY post of annaz --
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... .php?t=336

=clearly says 'no review of CM' is possible!

-polaris
Polaris Consulting and Engineering Services
=System Engg, Reliability, System Integration, Robotics.

fjgiie
DustMod
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 8:47 am
Location: Hampton, SC, US

Post by fjgiie » Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:57 pm

This topic is locked

fjgiie

Locked