I keep losing my purpose

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

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Post Reply
karinagw
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:59 am

I keep losing my purpose

Post by karinagw »

I completely understand that they have to have a way of judging our accuracy and keeping us on our toes, but, truthfully....sometimes I keep forgetting the bigger picture here and feel like I'm playing a rousing game of "Beat the Calibration Movie". It's not that I've stopped looking for and finding "stuff" (and most off the time at least a few other people have agreed with me), but I forget that the stardust is the aim, not getting caught by the calibrations.

...sigh....
/k
cthiker
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Woodbridge, CT

Re: I keep losing my purpose

Post by cthiker »

karinagw wrote:sometimes I keep forgetting the bigger picture here and feel like I'm playing a rousing game of "Beat the Calibration Movie".
"k" -

I know that feeling! However, if it helps, here are some of my IMHO (in my humble opinion) observations...

1) It's been estimated that there are now over 10,000 volunteers actively searching the VMs, which I also interpret as over 10,000 motivations and rationales for doing so. For some it's the "score", for others there's just the joy of participation. Regardless of how each volunteer gets there, though, the real "winners" will still be the S@H Team. Read some of the recent FAQ responses by Dr. Bryan Mendez and you'll see that, given the blind numbers, the system is working!

2) If you're getting bogged down in these discussions, I'd simply take a break from them for awhile. If you've pretty much got the hang of the VM system, and it sounds like you do, ignore the forum and go sweeping for a bit. If you encounter a problem, scan the FAQs briefly to see if there's a resolution out there already or post a question to this discussion if not. I feel that if I'm not in the fray then I must be above it, since the real outcomes are from the VMs and not the forum groups.

3) Lastly, I don't want to make it sound like I'm discounting the value of the forum and everyone's contributions - indeed, this is truly a learning experience for all of us (S@H Team included)! But if you feel bogged down in the discussions, I don't see it as a requirement to keep up - I think I'd rather concentrate my efforts on the VMs than on the discussion threads, all else being equal.

As I said, just my opinions, but if it helps in some way, great! As has been said, "If it's not fun you must not be doing it right." Best of luck to you, and everyone, in your sweep for dust!!!
speck
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:14 am
Location: Seattle, Wahington, USA, Earth

Post by speck »

Well said cthiker. Thank you.


speck
- Starlight, star bright, first star I see tonite - I wish I may, I wish I might, have the wish I wish tonite. - Anonymous
Sharqua
DustMod
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 1:02 am
Location: Bradenton, FL

Post by Sharqua »

This comment might help or hinder, but I find it helps me to keep in mind that this isn't a video game.

If I start getting bored, or if life interferes, I simply walk away for awhile and go do something else.

My tuppence, anyways.

-Shar
cthiker
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Woodbridge, CT

Post by cthiker »

Well said, Shar (and thank you, speck)! As some have said before, this is a marathon, not a sprint. Considering that one estimate indicated the average volunteer participation required for timely completion of the project was (I believe) less than 5 minutes a week, don't sweat it! In my book, that you're here and participating says a lot about you as an person and a supporter of scientific study!

Take a breather, then "dust" on! :D
karinagw
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:59 am

Thanks for the replies

Post by karinagw »

What it is, I think, more than anything else is that the calibration tracks on them are so hideously obvious (for the most part), but the ones without them seem to sometimes have residue splotches or something that looks to me like a potential track, but if I click it it gets counted against me and I'm getting to the point where I'm afraid to click something I think is there which kind of defeats the purpose of my looking at all.

Sorry for the hideous run-on there. It's been a long day on no sleep.
/k
cthiker
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Woodbridge, CT

Re: Thanks for the replies

Post by cthiker »

karinagw wrote:What it is, I think, more than anything else is that the calibration tracks on them are so hideously obvious (for the most part), but the ones without them seem to sometimes have residue splotches or something that looks to me like a potential track, but if I click it it gets counted against me and I'm getting to the point where I'm afraid to click something I think is there which kind of defeats the purpose of my looking at all.
You are not alone - just take a peek at these discussion threads!! However, again, IMHO, I feel free to use my brain (meager tho it is at times) and logic my way into or out of a decision. For example, if I see something below the surface that might be a track, I try to determine if it begins to meet the criteria I'd expect (if it does not go out of focus when I zoom below its level, if it does not come to a complete point but a 'donut' - even if quite small, is there surface disturbance before I see it appear and not the 'zoom-in' of a sub-surface speck, etc.). When in doubt I say make them look at it. If I'm wrong, and it's on a calibration movie, well, so be it. Overall I've not hit very many of those thus far where I'm really challenged - and when I am, if the focus is not deep enough for me to be confident I have no problem in saying "Bad Focus" to have someone else try again at a later date.

Judgement calls are not a bad thing, and, in the larger scheme, it's the judgement of a very large group that culminates in a priority decision. Note that that's what we're doing here, setting their priority for review - based on the info they've presented they won't ignore the VMs with minimal hits, they'll just save them for later on down the road when the rest have been thoroughly gone over.

So, relax, take your time, don't worry at all about the "score", and sweep for the tracks that, indeed, most of us may never find. And when something pops up that you think might be a candidate, go ahead and take the shot! You'll find that you're probably not alone!!

Hope that helps, and Happy Dusting!!!
Jeff
karinagw
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:59 am

Post by karinagw »

Hope that helps, and Happy Dusting!!!
It does, thanks.

Note to mods. While, I understand the need for scores, I would love an option to have my score hidden from me.
/k
farpung
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:01 am
Location: Quebec

Re: Thanks for the replies

Post by farpung »

karinagw wrote:What it is, I think, more than anything else is that the calibration tracks on them are so hideously obvious (for the most part), but the ones without them seem to sometimes have residue splotches or something that looks to me like a potential track, but if I click it it gets counted against me and I'm getting to the point where I'm afraid to click something I think is there which kind of defeats the purpose of my looking at all.
I agree that this is a problem. The calibration movies seem to have two purposes (1) to weight the credibility of each user's verdicts, and (2) to train/remind the users about what they should be looking for (and what they should be ignoring).
The problem I see is that we have been told that the tracks in the real movies may be significantly different from those in the tutorial, so our mental image of what might be a potential track should be genrously vague. For that reason, it is counterproductive if some of the "no track" calibration movies have items in them that could reasonably be considered potential tracks by a conscientious participant. Because,

(1) It weights the credibitly of the (perhaps less conscientious) users who only click on the obvious calibration tracks (and so perhaps have never found anything to click on a real movie) more highly than credibility of the more careful and conscientious users who click on anything that might conceivably be a track [having said that, I have answered 1140 correctly and only 9 wrongly, so I guess this is not a big problem], and

(2) More importantly, as you say karinagw, since we can't help taking notice of our scores, it makes us nervous about clicking on potential tracks in case it counts against us. Yesterday I came across 2 calibration movies with features that I think definitely should be clicked on in real movies, yet I was marked wrong for clicking on them. I have been seraching for those two so I can get theri ID numbers and point them out to the team, but haven't come across them again. Maybe they have already been pulled.
minkiemink
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: Topanga, California

Post by minkiemink »

Exactly why my sensitivity is several point lower than my specificity.......I would rather get one wrong on the CM's than perhaps miss an actual track.

The forum posters have been helpful by posting their possible tracks. The sideways tracks were a revelation to me as I hadn't considered those track forms, due to the limited examples on the CM's. I am not a scientist, so I am not aware of more track forms than the limited examples I am shown.

Cheers...

Minkie
“The true harvest of my life is intangible - a little star dust caught, a portion of the rainbow I have clutched”
-Henry David Thoreau
Wolter
DustMod
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 2:23 am
Location: Enkhuizen, the Netherlands

Post by Wolter »

The tracks in the tutorial as well as in the CM's are based on what is known and expected. The collector was flown in a right angle on the expected flow of stardust particals. So the expectation is that the majority of the tracks will look as in the tutorial. Perhaps smaller but with the donut characteristics.

But then again as said before this is al new sience so expect the unexpected.
Just dusting... Image
Post Reply