seven people thought so... don't know why though

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

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

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

Post by Wolter »

Betelgeuze wrote:Yeah the stats dont make a lot of sence, some things that are nothing get a lot of marks, and this one for example only got only 9 marks after 53 viewings while I clearly see a track:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=47394
If you are referering to the the dot in the upper left corner (say 80 microns from the left and 40 from the top) i don't think that's a track. the whole upperleft corner of this movie seems to be somewhat lower and only comes into focus on the lower 5/6 bars of the slider.
Just dusting... Image

coaxial
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 3:46 pm
Contact:

Post by coaxial »

Same thing with this. Focus isn't low enough to even tell, 6 agreements.
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=38336

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

Re: seven people thought so... don't know why though

Post by DustBuster »

Orion_0169 wrote:So, I flagged this one, just to see what kind of responses it might have.
Maybe you're not the only one doing that. I'm sure flagging non-track FOV's is in no way helping the project and that the exploration of this type of data is probably best left to the StarDust team.
No dessert for you- ONE MONTH!

Crystallize
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:14 pm

Post by Crystallize »

I would click on it either but complaining, complaining complaining... *sigh* that is also tiresome.

Remember, we are all doing our best.

Besides, it is the crew on the project that are suppose to watch through the most promising movies, may they also have some work to do ! :lol:
Image

Orion_0169
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:17 pm

Post by Orion_0169 »

DustBuster,

My doing that once in the thousands I have seen can't have anywhere near the impact that all the people flagging incorrectly on a regular basis does. Believe me, I wrestled with doing it in the first place, then the curiosity got the better of me, and the statistics made it harmless in my head.

Just the fact that me checking ONE of those movies and it had EIGHT hits would indicate that there are hundreds if not thousands more of those hits out there. To my ONE check.

Presumably we'd do better to fix those things first.
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

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

Post by DustBuster »

I didn't mean to imply that your one click was making a difference in the overall scheme. There are many possible explanations why the movie was clicked on a number of times.
I meant to stress that it couldn't help (particularly because it may encourage others to try it out) and that examination of these types of data don't seem to fall within the scope of the volunteer.
I'll wager that the StarDust team is collecting more statistics about each user's clicks than the rank and ratio numbers displayed in your account; so any speculation without knowledge of the full spectrum of data would be flawed.
No dessert for you- ONE MONTH!

Atus
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:13 am
Location: Hungary

41 of 63...

Post by Atus »

My best 'agreements' movie is 41 of 63:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=47027

First I thought it is a testing movie. I was very surprised, when I saw, that none of the testing movie count increased, but the real movie. The second shock was the poor agreement ratio on this (I guess) prety obvious movie.

:shock:

The second is 30 of 67:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=41903

There is also a 27 of 62:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=41978

In this movie, I can count 4 'obvious' something, and 3 more not-so-obvious something. :)

KarMann
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:05 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by KarMann »

OK, is this better then? I finally got my first accidental click, when I was meaning to focus the window but clicked on the movie. Now it shows up in My Events with 4/40, better than the next one I deliberately clicked on at 3/68 (even if you subtract my accident). And no intentional clicks on empty movies were made.
Let it never be said that your **** retentive attention to detail never yielded positive results. - Loki, Dogma

Atus
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:13 am
Location: Hungary

Post by Atus »

Crystallize: I just 'reviewed' Your top candidates.... I was just curious what others flag as a track. While I agree with you on 3-4 of the movies, I suspect that you marked objects on the surface on movie #35229 and #37574...

stardust1
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:08 pm
Location: Germany

Post by stardust1 »

Orion_0169 wrote:DustBuster,

My doing that once in the thousands I have seen can't have anywhere near the impact that all the people flagging incorrectly on a regular basis does. Believe me, I wrestled with doing it in the first place, then the curiosity got the better of me, and the statistics made it harmless in my head.

Just the fact that me checking ONE of those movies and it had EIGHT hits would indicate that there are hundreds if not thousands more of those hits out there. To my ONE check.

Presumably we'd do better to fix those things first.
@ Orion_0169

Your concerne is justifiable. But: maybe the conclusion is, that You flagged that bad focused movie. Your high score qualifies it at a high rank and that spreads it very widely.
So I would be very careful launching such fakes (your 1 doesn´t matter at all). Looking back I would like to cancel 10 of my first 100 candidates in "my events" (where is that button?). Looking foreward I´m trying to be even more sensitive and careful as I was until now. Beside those 10 I have no problem when other people agree to my candidates, because I recognized something looking like a track on them. The number of agreements on each individual candidate correlates quite good with the obviousness of a suspected track (top candidate: about 60 visits / 30 agreements). So I am very hopefully, system works fine anyway.

kind regards

peter (stardust1)
Wir leben in einer Zeit vollkommener Mittel und verworrener Ziele. (Albert Einstein)

Orion_0169
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:17 pm

Post by Orion_0169 »

Stardust,

I had just done it before that post. And it already had the pile of flags on it. That was my whole point. A pile of people before me, had flagged a movie that clearly was bad focus as it was only the last couple of layers that it came in. My issue was that if people were simply marking dots, then the flags are going to be WAY too numerous.

I appreciate the flag just in case approach, but when people are talking about having 70 and 100 events...

I can only hope that a week from now they are oging to say "Way to go everyone we found a thousand particles"

But I'm not holding my breath. Like I've said, if it was that easy, they wouldn't have asked for 100 000 volunteers (I know attrition and such)

It just seems a lot more likely that a week from now they're going to say... WHOAH hang on people relax, review the tutorials, understand what focus means, and stop flagging so much.

This whole thread was just a way to show that, I think, too many of us don't know enough about what we are doing.

For what it's worth, that little experiment has only been seen six more times. And averages maintaing. Two more of those six flagged it. It is now up to 10/27.

It is tied for eighth in my list for #oa and still ranks third (an estimate at a glance for the fractions) for how much people agree.

This is a movie that, I believe, CLEARLY should not get flagged, but nearly 40% of the people seeing it are doing so. That's not encouraging.
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

Sharqua
DustMod
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 1:02 am
Location: Bradenton, FL

Post by Sharqua »

What Orion said.

Hopefully they take the people with the highest accuracy for flagging calibration tracks (on top of those with the highest scores) and use them to give weight so they can sort through the chaff to find the little nuggets of gold. ;)

And that is why we are viewing every movie dozens of times. We need that many to get a good statistical view of where the important stuff is at.

:mrgreen:

stardust1
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:08 pm
Location: Germany

Post by stardust1 »

Sharqua wrote:What Orion said.

Hopefully they take the people with the highest accuracy for flagging calibration tracks (on top of those with the highest scores) and use them to give weight so they can sort through the chaff to find the little nuggets of gold. ;)

And that is why we are viewing every movie dozens of times. We need that many to get a good statistical view of where the important stuff is at.

:mrgreen:
As I understood, the system does exactly what you demand for. Ranking an individual movie at the supposed "quality" of those who found it. When I´m talking about "high scores" I´m talking about high numbers of correctly identified calibration movies and high values on sensitivity and high values on specificity (eg. 2620/100/98 as mine).
If system does that difference not, the concerns of Orion_0169 would be more than justifiable: multiplicating any silly click by factor 100 and mix them in the pool. This way the projected 20,000 - 30,000 hours of manpower will not be sufficient.

Would be nice, to get some feedback from officials about those methodic topics.

peter (sturdust1)
Wir leben in einer Zeit vollkommener Mittel und verworrener Ziele. (Albert Einstein)

mwhiz
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington, USA

Post by mwhiz »

hey guys... i think when there's a real track it'll get reallll close to 100/100, but that's just my prediction. i think everyone understands your point orion, some people are just hoping that you didn't start a fad of clicking random ones to see how many clicks they have... :D
"The Earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever."
~Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

Orion_0169
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:17 pm

Post by Orion_0169 »

Even with it progressing from my one click to a fad (I would hope people would at least have wrestled with it like I did, or at the very least (lol) not allowing people to partake in the fad until their total movies approaches 10 000 (makes me wonder what else I've done this week)) I think it would pale in comparison to the over-flagging already going on.

The top 100 list now begins at over 1000...
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

Post Reply