ALL OF MY INFORMATION HAS BEEN ERASED.

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

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

minkiemink
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: Topanga, California

ALL OF MY INFORMATION HAS BEEN ERASED.

Post by minkiemink »

Uh...Ok....I give....why exactly has all of my information been erased? When I last logged off, I was ranked at 53, had an overall score of 3115, specificity and sensitivity percentages. Now I have nothing. Everything is at zero. This after viewing some 9000 + movies.

Strangely enough, I still have a list of events. Must have done them psychically. The weirdest thing is that although you have bizarrely started me over, I am ranked #10677 out of 11409.

Did somebody hit the wrong button???? Could you please replace my statistics, or contact me to let me know what the heck is going on? Did I imagine that I was searching for stardust all of this time?

Thanks.

Minkiemink
“The true harvest of my life is intangible - a little star dust caught, a portion of the rainbow I have clutched”
-Henry David Thoreau
minkiemink
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: Topanga, California

Post by minkiemink »

Doh....score was 3121 I think...

M
“The true harvest of my life is intangible - a little star dust caught, a portion of the rainbow I have clutched”
-Henry David Thoreau
gamalmfalyii
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 7:46 am
Location: New York City
Contact:

Post by gamalmfalyii »

http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... .php?t=874

That should shed some light upon the subject
"She said a good day
ain't got no rain
She said a bad day's when I lie in bed
and think of things that might have been"
LeeRyder
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:27 pm
Location: Redondo Beach, CA.
Contact:

Post by LeeRyder »

:roll:

Perhaps now you will spend time scanning not just clicking?
Don't sweat the small stuff. It's part of life, and no one gets out alive.
minkiemink
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: Topanga, California

Post by minkiemink »

Gee...nice rude replies. Nice assumptions. I did not cheat in any way. I found that at least the obvious CM's spottable by their type of obvious screen patterns, so I clicked them quickly and went on. I could also easily see that some clearly gels had no tracks, after running the focus back and forth and that some were just out of focus. Those also I would click quickly and move on. I searched what I perceived to be movies that were ambiguous, that might contain possible real tracks. I think that the number of errors I had proves that. 138 wrong. I always clicked in favor of the possibility.

If it matters, I am a jeweler. I set multiple little tiny stones all day. I am very visual. My work involves tiny patterns. When I take a break from soldering little tiny parts and setting little tiny stones in little tiny settings, I look for little tiny star tracks. I also have an affinity for this project as I used to date an astrophysicist who studied cold particle dust emissions. My main focus was looking for tracks, and in one posting I even requested to see fewer CM's.

The unfortunate implication at least in my case is erroneous.

Best,

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
icebike

Post by icebike »

gamalmfalyii wrote:http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... .php?t=874

That should shed some light upon the subject


SMACK!
Sweet!
rcklein
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 11:48 am
Location: Jessup, Maryland, USA

I have not "cheated".

Post by rcklein »

While I will continue to put in the same level of effort I have from the beginning of this project, I resent the accusation that I have bypassed real images to get to calibrations. If you have log records, you know how many hours every day I have spent and how many images I have processed, including new targets and confirmation of other's targets. I personally think that calibration ranking is meaningless. The important statistic is the number of real targets identified.

One condition that allowed me to quickly evaluate a lot of images was the abundance of "Bad Focus" images. Maybe 50% had surface levels in the "Focus down" area, had fuzzy focus or no focus, or had other factors that led to my opinion that they be rescanned
JOC
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:59 pm

Post by JOC »

You'll have to plead your case with the Stardust team [if you have a case to plead, that is].

But if it's conclusive that, as in the illustrative example in the Update report, you were one of those(unnamed, and welcomed to continue in a proper manner) who spent nearer to zero seconds on the real movies than on the calibration movies, then I have no sympathy. It's either cheating the science or a disastrous lack of diligence.

The calibration movies are starkly obvious - to routinely spend more time on those than on a real movie is nonsensical. Regardless of whether it's bad focus/almost nothing visible/etc --- you have to look still harder to see if you can salvage some information --- those difficulties add to the time, not shorten it!


[To the MODs - I see two possibilites for this thread: lock it to save everyone from protracted wrangling, or make it a sticky as a warning to those who are tempted!!]
Twinkle, twinkle, little dust!
How I wonder which to trust!
From stars above the world you fell!
Buried like treasure in aerogel.
minkiemink
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: Topanga, California

Post by minkiemink »

I found the first thousand or so movies to be a learning curve. As the examples of tracks are so very limited. I probably rushed through some real movies, (although I had no idea that they were "real" movies), as I rarely if ever saw anything even remotely resembling what the CM's showed me, except on what turned out to be CM's. At first I even wrote to ask why the events I clicked on didn't show up in my events. As I said, I am not a scientist.

I often went back and forth on those CM's to see if there was anything different that I should be looking for that I was missing in the other movies. After I was able to read the forums, (I couldn't log on at first because there was something wrong with my account), I could see that there were other possibilities in what the tracks might look like, and so slowed down in my viewing looking for what the CM's did not show me.

As I said, I am a jeweler. Part of my work is micro-pave. Google it. There are often several hundred stones per piece. I also loom seed pearls of less than 1mm. My livelihood is in part reliant on my speed.

I appear to be penalized here for my speed in both ability to spot either a pattern, or the lack thereof. I have written the team to reconsider, and we will see what comes of it.

In the mean time, I am still looking, not knowing if my inherent speed will again mark me somehow. Should I just spend more time scanning back and forth even when I am certain that there is no track there?

One theory I had has proven to be true. Starting at the bottom again, I am now identifying events that only 9-12 people have previously seen, where before, there was almost nothing that I identified as a track that hadn't been prieviously viewed by 90 or so before me. I had asked about that, and was assured that the real movies were random. Apparently, but perhaps mostly to beginners. Ergo, somewhat ironically, I now have a better chance of finding an actual track.........which was my goal in the first place.

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

Post by Sharqua »

JOC wrote:[To the MODs - I see two possibilites for this thread: lock it to save everyone from protracted wrangling, or make it a sticky as a warning to those who are tempted!!]
Heh.

Actually we're trying to treat this with a light touch if possible. If the folks who got zeroed out wish to plead their case, they can PM the admins, as we are merely message board mods and have no say-so in this matter. I'm here in case the language gets abusive or vulgar, not to squelch a complaint.

All I can offer is an opinion, and the folks affected wouldn't find my opinion helpful to them.

Hope that makes sense.

-Shar
cgore82
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:20 am
Location: Columbia, SC, USA

Post by cgore82 »

It seems to me that if someone were truly interested in finding particles, they wouldn't complain so much about losing their score; as I understand it, one would be given just as much credit for finding a particle with a score of 1 as with a score of 10000.
minkiemink
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: Topanga, California

Post by minkiemink »

The score is meaningless. The attendant implication of cheating is not.
“The true harvest of my life is intangible - a little star dust caught, a portion of the rainbow I have clutched”
-Henry David Thoreau
LeeRyder
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:27 pm
Location: Redondo Beach, CA.
Contact:

Post by LeeRyder »

OK lets clear this up: It's not an issue of cheating cause the only prize is finding a particle.

That said, you are HURTING the project by knowingly and willingly stat padding! You know it, and regardless of your denial... I know it, as do that people watching the scores.

Here's a good indication: If it takes me, using a cable modem, a full 2-3 seconds for a page with all associatted images, to load.. and the timer begins the instant I land on that page, before all images are loaded, how can you sit here and claim that you have viewed all slides in association with that "slide">???? You CAN'T! It is impossible to view the slides and judge them in that period!

You claim that you only did it in the first 1,000 or so movies, but this is the AVG of ALL your movies viewed. Not just calibration movies, not just the first 1,000.

It is apparent to all that if you were erased, you were cheating. Denying it only betrays your word to us, as a community working for the betterment of this project, but also cheats others here who are actively trying to find particles. Thats not cool and not needed. So pipe down, take your medicine, and begin anew if you feel it is still worth it.
Don't sweat the small stuff. It's part of life, and no one gets out alive.
gamalmfalyii
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 7:46 am
Location: New York City
Contact:

Post by gamalmfalyii »

Seriously who cares if some people lost their scores...I know I don't care at all. I mean, it's explained clearly by butterworth that those who breeze past the real movies and carefully click the test movies does seem somewhat conspicuous. My score blows, I have hardly any wrong but even if I lost my score, I could care less. Personally, all I care about is being able to keep the movies that were logged as events. If they deleted the score AND the events then I would be pissed. But as it stands, they went on stats and the method they used to weed out the cheaters in their own way makes sense. If it seems unfair then do as the mod said and pm the admins to check it out for you.
"She said a good day
ain't got no rain
She said a bad day's when I lie in bed
and think of things that might have been"
cgore82
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:20 am
Location: Columbia, SC, USA

Post by cgore82 »

minkiemink wrote:The score is meaningless. The attendant implication of cheating is not.
So, the admins hurt your feelings? Oh no. Sticks and stones, buddy.
Post Reply