stat padders already?

Discuss your experiences with and ideas about Stardust@home here.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Galactic Groove
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:20 am

stat padders already?

Post by Galactic Groove »

I can't believe the stats people are getting already. Yesterday, pretty much 24 hours ago, the highest score was from JFM3 at a little above 800, the next highest was from jorn at 500 something. Today, MadmanNR has 1775. Now with approximately 33% of the slides being test slides (atleast for me it is), that means this guy has scanned roughly 5300 slides in 24 hours. That's 3.5 slides per minute for a full 24 hours. Now that average alone isn't bad, but for a full 24 hours??? cmon... my eyes get all buggy after 2 hours. In my opinion, the only way to accumulate those numbers in such a short amount of time is to keep clicking No Track repeatedly, 5000 times.

In this case, I propose a time counter that would track the amount of time being spent to analyse a movie. If you're spending less than (for argument sake) 10 seconds on a movie, I dont' believe you're performing a thorough enough scan and would not be contributing anything meaningful to this research project (unless it was a bad focus slide). As a result, it should have some negative effect on you the same way the test slides do if you are doing poorly with them.

What are other peoples thoughts on the current stats being recorded and a solution like the one above? Anyone else have other ideas about how to deal with this situation?

PS: a stat padder is someone who tweaks their stats in a manner that truly doesn't represent or reflect their actual ability.

Regards

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

Post by Orion_0169 »

For starters you could read another thread. Yet another fabricated average. Ten seconds this time. Last time it was 20. And like I said last time, sometimes... often I can ID and dismiss a callibration movie in less than a second. THAT pulls the average down dramatically.

Might some people be cheating? Certainly. But like in all things in life, it's also just simply possible people are better at some things than others. And those that aren't as good can either accept it, try to improve themselves, or try to pull down the better ones. Which will you be?
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

Galactic Groove
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:20 am

Post by Galactic Groove »

i'm sorry but your response seems somewhat ignorant of the facts... 5000 slides a day is highly highly suspicious

and the time to take to analyse, 10 or 20, isnt' up to me, as i said above it was simply for argument sake

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

Post by Orion_0169 »

Ignorant of the facts. How cute. Tee hee. I'm one of the people that's been accused of cheating.

I don't watch the address bar. I don't even watch the ID#'s. I just watch the movies. And plenty of them go by in less than a second. Whether because it's an easy callibration one getting in the way, or an near empty movie, or whatever.

Want some stats to mull over? Rather than doing some productive work? Here you go... so far today for me... in parenthese was from when I started this morning. One window. By myself. Lots of breaks.)

Calibration Movies Answered Correctly 1087 (+204)
Calibration Movies Answered Incorrectly 36 (+3)
Your Overall Score: 1051 (+201)
Total Real Movies Viewed: 3159 (+536)
Your Rank: 8 out of 5961
Specificity: 100%
Sensitivity: 94% (+1)

A time counter? Great. And maybe when a kid in grade one knows all the answers, the teachers can wait a while before letting anyone answer so more people get to try.

Oh wait that IS WHAT TEACHERS DO. Yes that's right, they are TAUGHT the strategy of allowing the slower, inept students the CHANCE to be right.

And that only teaches the EXCELLENT students that being excellent is not valued.

So I should be slowed down by YOUR incompetence? Like I said earlier, I won't apologise for someone else's inferiority.

How about you just try harder?
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

Galactic Groove
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:20 am

Post by Galactic Groove »

you really know how to debate... please don't reply as your answers aren't productive, just defensive
and for future reference, keep your superiority complex to yourself :D

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

Post by Orion_0169 »

Uh huh. Alrighty, since you are yet another person who seems to think they know what is possible or reasonable, I'll ask YOU as well, have you heard of the Reverend Robert Evans?

As for debate, I think I handled your timing suggestion quite well, good people shouldn't be penalised for the inadequacies of others.

As for the ten seconds, it was, simply a fabricated number. What gives you the right to suggest it in the first place? Did you do some data analysis of how long you are spending on movies? Are you representative of the average?

This isn't about being defensive. It's about getting people to recognise that sometimes people are simply better at some things.

But hey, maybe you were one of the kids in grade one who needed the clever ones to be shut up so you'd get a chance.

Superiority complex? Again, I won't apologise for other people's inferiority. Apparently you decided on number three... try to drag people down.

So, go look up the name I mentioned.

Then, try to be more supportive and encouraging. try to remember what brought people here.
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

jaco
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 5:40 pm
Location: Chongqing, China

Post by jaco »

Robert Evans....yea Bob Evans....he's the guy who makes like the saucages and stuff...Bob Evans for that down on the farm taste....

Galactic Groove
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:20 am

Post by Galactic Groove »

lmao, you're so transparent it's not even funny anymore

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

Post by Orion_0169 »

Really? How so? Care to back your claims? Or is this what you do when you are bested?

I've said from the start, I'm just plugging along. If you don't like that people might be better than you at something, give up or get better, rather than try to take away from their accomplishments.

Have you looked into that name I mentioned yet? You might learn something about people's perception of the impossible. And appreciating talents in others.
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

nexguy
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:44 am
Location: Texas

Post by nexguy »

I do not mean to rag, but how have you missed 39 calibration movies?

The calibration movie tracks are supposed to be the easiest tracks to spot. If you've missed 39 of the easiest to spot, imagine how many possible real tracks you might miss. It might not bother you to miss tracks and it's really not my business, but it seems logical that if you truely spend time looking at each video it would be almost impossible to miss one. The only exception would be if you thought you spotted one on a calibration movie that supposedly didn't have one.

It's been said that there are anywhere from 1-3 tracks to find in the current group of movies(40,000). This is the expected amount whereas it could be higher. So you have a 10% chance that one has already come your way. Wouldn't you want to be sure to spot it?

Not to mention you might be confirming one someone else already found, wouldn't you want to be sure you confirmed it too?

Wubby
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:04 pm

Post by Wubby »

Whether or not 5000 a day is stats padding or not, could anyone really believe s/he is carefully looking at each movie? This shouldn't be a race or about who has the highest score. It may be fun for people to gloat, which may keep them interested, but a complex movie should take much longer than 17sec. If you are trying to be fast, you should go do something else. If you think you can do it fast, you should go do something else.

If a track movie gets ranked on # of agreed, then false negatives will do more damage that false positives. Speed will miss a small track.

uberwilhelm
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 1:23 pm

Post by uberwilhelm »

I'm going to have to agree. I have over 600 real movies and 220 calibrations in two days and have only missed 4 calibrations ( although I think one of them was bogus) so I can't imagine you being all that accurate by whipping through so many. This isn't a race or contest, we are supposed to be helping with a scientific process. Attention to detail is what they need, not speed readers.

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

Post by Orion_0169 »

I've missed 36 not 39, first of all. And that's out of 1178, so my accuracy is 96.94% right now. I know of at least one movie that I have been incorrectly marked on three times. Don't know if there are others. The bulk of the errors were very early on. My specificity/sensitivity are now at 100/94. Moving the 94 up from 87 with my numbers so high is evidence that my success rate now is significantly higher. At one point a couple of days ago people were noticinf a discepency in the scores, based on the callibrated correct/incorrect. The discrepencies for me, all came up as misses, all at once, so that skews how well I can judge when I've been making the mistakes.

I would like to think (cheaters aside) that when people have been through 1200 callibration movies, legitimately, that my 97% success rate stands as a good score. If not, I'll keep working on improving it. For the people that much better than this, more power to them. Unlike others around here, I'd commend them for that success rather than drag them down or make baseless accusations.

Over the last 800 about 97.7%
Over the last 600 about 98.4%

I think (hope) I'm doing okay.

As for not missing things, if 3000 members here were sitting at 100% while I was at 97%, I suppose I'd be happy to condede the work to them, but the couple decimals of percentages here and there won't make that much difference. And like I've said in other threads, some of the callibration movies have VERY small tracks. I'd be happy to cut anyone some slack for missing a few of those.

I don't consider that ragging.
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

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

Post by Orion_0169 »

I'll say again. First look up Robert Evans. Second, it might be reasonable that some people have superior strategies than others and that they can see the signs quicker. How are you at word searches? Do you skim through them line by line looking for the letter or look at the whole thing and have the words all just jump out at you? Why is it so unreasonable to believe a few people could be capable of processing the visual field so much faster and efficiently? Sigh.
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

nexguy
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:44 am
Location: Texas

Post by nexguy »

Sorry, I saw that +3 next to 36 and thought you meant 39...heh


However, who says 97% is good? That's 3 out of 100 wrong. Sure that's good in school, but when we are looking for a needle in a haystack of haystacks, 97% seems pretty inaccurate. With a 1 in 40,000 chance of finding a track, missing 1,200 out of 40,000(3%) seems drastic.
Last edited by nexguy on Fri Aug 04, 2006 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Locked