Tutorial/Examples/CMs

Post here if you are having any kind of problem with the Stardust@home website.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Post Reply
jsmaje
Posts: 616
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 8:39 am
Location: Manchester UK

Tutorial/Examples/CMs

Post by jsmaje »

Having been here from shortly after the beginning, I've rarely reviewed the Tutorial, nor the 'Examples' frames available when on the VM. But having just done so in case there was anything new or helpful, I can't discern any change from the same old poor-quality movies/frames, despite Bryan's promise here (over 4 months ago) that they were working on a new version of the Tutorial. Nor can I see any excuse for the confusing labelling in the 'Examples' of a low-angle, almost horizontal, track described simply as 'Large', compared with the classic perpendicular carrot-track we're supposed to be looking for as 'Small' (despite it being larger than anything seen so far, except some CMs)!
And still no mention of likely 'inclusions' and how to evaluate them. Have they stopped recruiting, and are presuming that whoever of us are still going can be trusted to know what we're doing?

Amongst all the other recent glitches (JS errors, double-length double movies, repeat 8013178V1, etc.), the only thing I think actually has improved lately is the welcome higher quality of positive CMs: I posted hereabout it, but without response so far. My long concern has been that the easy ability to score on CMs (both +ve & -ve, whose jpeg compression artefacts are easy to recognise) has fuelled the race for gaining Certificates and reaching the top 100, regardless of the much greater discrimination needed when viewing 'real' movies.

Comments anyone?

elainekeefe
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:38 am
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Post by elainekeefe »

Hi jsmaje,

I always find your posts interesting. I have to say, I find the tracks in new CM's easier to spot. The background is smoother, and they almost always have that telltale black "cloud" just before they come into view. They pretty much just jump right out at you.

Personally, I wish the team would spend less time on the CM's and more on working out the bugs in the real movies. I find an abysmal number of them to be bad focus...1 in 4 maybe?....and still have a fair number of them getting "stuck" in the downloading process. It seems to me that by now the team must have a pretty good idea of who is accurate and who is not.

Do you suppose any of the new real movies have been prepared after removing the foil? It may just be my imagination, but the backgrounds in many of the movies seem less turbulent to me.

As far as new tutorials concerning inclusions, I suspect the team is not really sure about them themselves. I have pretty much stopped clicking on them, depending on circumstances (too many) and size. The "tracks" in some of the movies selected as first cut, however, don't look much different from what I would consider inclusions.

Example: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =1723349V1

Oh well, back to dusting...or trying to.

scopdrvr
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:26 pm
Location: Lafayette, IN, USA

Post by scopdrvr »

I always find your posts interesting. I have to say, I find the tracks in new CM's easier to spot. The background is smoother, and they almost always have that telltale black "cloud" just before they come into view. They pretty much just jump right out at you.
Might the black "cloud" above tracks in CM's give us a clue to finding real tracks? Inclusions have a ring that quickly focuses to a point and back to a ring while tracks don't. Perhaps real tracks have some trace of the cloud at the surface, too?

Nikita
DustMod
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:33 pm
Location: Indiana, USA

Post by Nikita »

scopdrvr wrote:
I always find your posts interesting. I have to say, I find the tracks in new CM's easier to spot. The background is smoother, and they almost always have that telltale black "cloud" just before they come into view. They pretty much just jump right out at you.
Might the black "cloud" above tracks in CM's give us a clue to finding real tracks? Inclusions have a ring that quickly focuses to a point and back to a ring while tracks don't. Perhaps real tracks have some trace of the cloud at the surface, too?
Hmmm.....Interesting possibility! Can't wait until a real one is identified and we can see! Good suggestion!
From dust we come

jsmaje
Posts: 616
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 8:39 am
Location: Manchester UK

Post by jsmaje »

elainekeefe wrote:Do you suppose any of the new real movies have been prepared after removing the foil? It may just be my imagination, but the backgrounds in many of the movies seem less turbulent to me.
Hi Elaine. As understand it, removal of the backing foil has so far been somewhat experimental, in the hope that this will give better visualisation by exclusive illumination from below (as with most microscopes), but that no such new movies have yet been released to us.

startrak
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 3:53 pm
Location: Kennebunk, ME

Examples

Post by startrak »

Wish there were better examples for Phase II. It appears the examples shown are still from Phase I. I've studied most of the Forum movies that have come up and always go back to study incorrect and correct answers and am still having a hard time. Recently clicked "a track" on CM 2048915V1 showing up in the last three blue bars and was scored wrong. On CM 9621868V1 when the "track" appeared in the last three blue bars thinking tracks don't show up in the last three bars I clicked no track only to be scored wrong. Unfortunately I'm not sure what to look for except the obvious that appeared in Phase I. Wish I could be more help with my viewings.

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

Help!

Post by fjgiie »

Hi startrak,

You showed the new high resolution movies to us so I will try to help you with them.
This is just what I think to be correct and how I would have judged these two movies.

2048915V1 Left bottom, right above the trash. 30, 235

9621868V1 Top, left of center

startrak
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 3:53 pm
Location: Kennebunk, ME

Re. Help

Post by startrak »

Thank you so much for your help, fjgiie. I completey missed both the "tracks". No wonder my Sensitivity is so low. Too bad one of those CMs or something similar aren't used as an Example.

bmendez
Stardust@home Team
Stardust@home Team
Posts: 530
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 11:28 am
Location: UC Berkeley Space Sciences Lab
Contact:

Re: Examples

Post by bmendez »

startrak wrote:Wish there were better examples for Phase II. It appears the examples shown are still from Phase I. I've studied most of the Forum movies that have come up and always go back to study incorrect and correct answers and am still having a hard time. Recently clicked "a track" on CM 2048915V1 showing up in the last three blue bars and was scored wrong. On CM 9621868V1 when the "track" appeared in the last three blue bars thinking tracks don't show up in the last three bars I clicked no track only to be scored wrong. Unfortunately I'm not sure what to look for except the obvious that appeared in Phase I. Wish I could be more help with my viewings.
startrak,

You should view the candidate page as examples of things found in Phase 1 that we here at Berkeley are interested in following up: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... esnews.php

Also, have a look at the updated tutorial: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... _start.php

The examples page is really more for helping you to identify things which are not worth clicking on (except for the example tracks).

-Bryan
"I am made from the dust of the stars, and the oceans flow in my veins"
- RUSH

startrak
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 3:53 pm
Location: Kennebunk, ME

U[dated Tutorials

Post by startrak »

Thanks so much for your time, Bryan. Have restudied the tutorials and must say am even more confused. For example I would probably click the place under the arrow on #17 and would definitely click no track on #18 as it goes out of focus. Perhaps? that's why my no track click was given a wrong score on TM 3218485V1.

Just when I think I've got it I'm back to square one -- it's a lot like my golf game.

Post Reply