Have fun extracting inclusions

[the moon]

Yeah I looked all the movies on the list of possible IS tracks from phase 1, not encouraging. Almost all are small inclusions. A few are track "shaped" debri on the surface of misleading slanted surfaces, like numbers 16 and 18 in the new tutorial.
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... _number=16
As for number 17, I almost see what they're saying by "it extends downward and slightly up as you focus down" but there are too many other similiar looking inclusions in the same movie. I'm betting the slight extention is just a focus artifact. At any rate, if I see a CM with that feature in it, I won't be clicking it.

Moving on to the high angle tracks. Those all seemed to be real, but they missed mine cause it only got 10% clickers
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =9987464V1
Oh well it's going the same direction as all the rest so probably from the same source.

Back to the IS list. Some of the movies didn't seem to have anything at all where the coordinates pointed, what's going on there?
1. http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... fied%20yet
2. http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... fied%20yet
3. http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... fied%20yet
4. http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... fied%20yet
5. http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... fied%20yet
6. http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... fied%20yet

More unsolicated opinions coming soon after I check out the new movies and CMs.

[Stadt]

I totally agree with you. I was also puzzled by the movies you pointed out. Maybe the first clickers haven't always clicked at the best position? Typo's sneaked in?

Back to the IS list. Some of the movies didn't seem to have anything at all where the coordinates pointed, what's going on there?

Except maybe for

6.
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... fied%20yet

There is a faint shadow coming up at the top right edge of the peckle near that position. That might be the track meant

More unsolicated opinions coming soon after I check out the new movies and CMs.

I'd be most interested

[Titanium]

On this topic (sort of), what should we do about things like this? On the last frame you can see something come into focus, but I am not sure if I should click on something like this...

[marcia]

Hi the moon, Stadt and Titanium,
I agree that the candidates are rather doubtful tracks. Like you, the moon, I would judge the most of them as 'track shaped debri' on the surface. And I think it's more a visual effect of the microscope. In the beginning of 'phase I' this kind of things attract my attention and I clicked on it, but later on I saw them so often that I thought it to be impossible this were tracks. But may be the team has a better overview... The tricky thing is now that I have to click on 'tracks' I'm not convinced they are tracks. But so what, if the team wants a lot of work.... ('walking dots' instead of inclusions)
But really, I could NOT see only a very few of this candidates (may be I'm getting old and need new glasses), and for the rest of the candidates I really think they mean the big dots, like the one you, Stadt (Hé, hallo!), are referring to. If you look very close and slow you can see a difference with inclusions and why they think it could be a track (the moving). But I'm still very unsure, so don't blame me if I'm completely wrong.
And Titanium, if you mean the thing left and up from the centre, I think IMHO that's an inclusion.

Last but not least: I really hope we will find, with the 50 micron movies, a real track. I still love them when I see them in the CM's. They feel good.
Marcella

[marcia]

I have to add something: the moon, I think you are much more right than I first thought. Again I looked to this candidates, and really, the most are IMHO surface dust, only they look in a way like a track (a hole or something like that). But if you look to other parts of the same movie, most of the time you see the same things, the same pattern, on or under the surface. And there are only 3 movies I don't see anything at all on the coordinates.
But they are still 'candidates', isn't it?
I'm only afraid I can't learn from this candidates on the CM's. Specially if you see them far under the surface.

[farpung]

In most, if not all al the movies listed above, "something" comes into focus below the surface, probably an inclusion. The weird thing is they are never at the coordinates indicated! Usually, there is nothing visible at the coordinates indicated. Is there something wrong with the coordinate system?

[rlcwik]

I agree with farpung. Most of these are crazy.

In the first example it looks like they are pointing to an artifact in the lense that is in most of the cm’s near center bottom.

In the second one I see my name in the list but I am sure I clicked on something to the right at 375H X 110V. I don’t know what the heck they are pointing at over there on the left.

[farpung]

I think either there is a mix-up with the coordinate system or with the movie numbering. But it seems to more than a conincidence that there is *something* that comes into focus below the surface in each movie, so I am guessing that is what they have singled out for further inspection, and that the cordinates indicated are completely wrong, for some reason.

I hope the team looks into this urgently, because it is clearly off-putting to diligent dusters to have apparently nonsensical information about the current candidate tracks. Also, if they consider these to be among the best so far, they want us to keep selecting them. In that case, they shouldn't be telling us not to select "inclusions". Either way, these should be the prime examples of what we are looking for, and with the current coordinates, they are surely worse than useless at doing that!

Most of the features I select are no doubt 'inclusions' (not that anyone really knows for sure what the heck 'inclusions' are!) - that is the only way to keep my specificity where it is at the moment after 384 real movies -- 100%. On the other hand, my sensitivity of 91% means that there are sometimes features that come into focus beneath the surface in some "no track" calibration movies.

[Titanium]

As for movie #4, I can see why they might think it's a track due to the small particle that shows up below the surface near something that looks like it might be a hole on the surface.

#6 has that thing in about the 2:00 o'clock position that makes it look like it goes below the surface a bit.

But I don't see how the others "go below the surface". My understanding was that tracks continue through the aerogel. I understand that the opening may cause distortion, but there would still be something near the bottom slides.

One thing that makes sense to me is this type: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... fied%20yet
because perhaps that's the opening and then the particle on the bottom.

Here are two candidates that remind me of something ERSTRS said: Movie 1 and Movie 2
She said

Small tracks, to me, always have a light center, and most have a satillite "dot" beside them---as you scoll, a small dot will come into focus right beside them. Not all have this, but the majority of small tracks do. A track "stands out" from the rest.

I notice that there are two small specks associated with these candidates. Is this something the Team wants us to look for?

I will say My Events list is full of things I think might be inclusions, but it seems that it's better to click than not to. We will start getting answers once they extract things. I'll keep doing it my way until then. Sorry for rambling.

[the moon]

So I'm finally getting into seeing some of the new movies. I just got a job as a diamond grader, so all day at work I look for inclusions in a microscope (no joke), so as you might guess I'm not in a hurry to do it again at home.

Anyway, my impression is still that we aren't getting enough information to make good calls on these spots that appear under the surface. Either you can't see enough of the surrounding area, or the focus doesn't go low enough. What I would love to see is, along with every high magnification movie, put a link to the old phase I movie it came from. That link opens a new window with just the old movie as if you were viewing it from your events page, you can't mark tracks or anything. It would just be for referrence to help you see if the surface is slanted or if there's other similiar inclusions around. The main problem with this is I don't know how to work it in with the CM system. It would be too much trouble to make links for CMs but if you don't, a movie without a link would be a dead give away CM.

As for the new CMs, I've only seen a few, 14. It seems they lowered the CM/real ratio to 10-15% which is nice. I only saw 1 new one like tutorial #17 so I can't comment on those which seem to be causing the most trouble for people. Most are still the old school CMs. I have many questions about this one though
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... rds=?-1,-1
It's the old CM track we all grew up with, but we're seeing more of it for the first time. My questions for the team are, is that the end of it this time? Are we seeing the deepest part of the track in the last frame? Does it really fade out like that without getting smaller first? How deep was the actual particle? Was it near that last frame or does the track become transparent after that and extend further?

In other words, is that really what we should be looking for?