Stardust@home Suggestion Thread
Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods
-
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:17 pm
A set of threads specific to movie numbers would cut down on new threads each and every time someone finds something they think is a track.
Check out... 10000-14999
Check out... 15000-19999
Or somesuch.
<shrugs>
I'd like to see a list somewhere of all the movies people have considered suspect. It must be massively large by now. Added bonus of this, would be, when you see a movie that you think other people might have, but you choose not, you could go see how others felt, without starting a thread to ask.
I'm sure soon enough someone will start a thread asking for #'s of events!
Check out... 10000-14999
Check out... 15000-19999
Or somesuch.
<shrugs>
I'd like to see a list somewhere of all the movies people have considered suspect. It must be massively large by now. Added bonus of this, would be, when you see a movie that you think other people might have, but you choose not, you could go see how others felt, without starting a thread to ask.
I'm sure soon enough someone will start a thread asking for #'s of events!
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:10 am
Improving the quality of results
I have a few suggestions to make about the VM, and more specifically the calibration movies, that may help to improve the assessment of the average user. (N.B. Apologies in advance if you have already considered such amendments to the VM.)
Additional Calibration Suggestions:
As far I can tell (after viewing over 400 calibration movies) they are only designed to check a user's ability to confirm, or deny, the presence of a valid track within a 'well-formed' movie. (i.e. One where the surface is easily located and the user has scope to focus below the surface level.)
I believe that if additional calibration movies were introduced to encourage a correct response for the more complex examples, that are seen within the genuine data set, then a higher accuracy of movie assessment would be attained.
Movies which don't appear to change throughout the focus range:
Additional Calibration Suggestions:
As far I can tell (after viewing over 400 calibration movies) they are only designed to check a user's ability to confirm, or deny, the presence of a valid track within a 'well-formed' movie. (i.e. One where the surface is easily located and the user has scope to focus below the surface level.)
I believe that if additional calibration movies were introduced to encourage a correct response for the more complex examples, that are seen within the genuine data set, then a higher accuracy of movie assessment would be attained.
Movies which don't appear to change throughout the focus range:
Movies where the surface focus level is too low to reveal whether a track exists.
Unable to determine the surface focus levelhttp://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=48802
(N.B. The surface anomolies at top of picture only in focus at lowest position... therefore, imposisble to ascertain whether a track exists under the surface at this position in the movie.)
Correct response: BAD FOCUS
Movie seems to be an amalgamation of two movies - but picture only changes at the very bottom of the focus range.
Movie seems to be an amalgamation of two movies - picture only changes halfway down the focus range.http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=13723
Correct response: NO TRACK - as user to able to give an accurate appraisal of the image.
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=27903
Correct response: BAD FOCUS - user unable to ascertain whether a track does / doesn't exist in movie.
I have just posted a suggestion on the "Problems and Support" forum on this very topic because I don't think there are any 'BAD FOCUS' calibration movies... but perhaps there should be.I'm wondering: are any calibration movies Bad Focus? Because I had one where there was nothing ... slight shift in gray scale, no indication of Surface ... and I think I got scored wrong.
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =improving
Actually I'd like to see these come to an end.Orion_0169 wrote:A set of threads specific to movie numbers would cut down on new threads each and every time someone finds something they think is a track.
Check out... 10000-14999
Check out... 15000-19999
Or somesuch.
There is really no need to post every suspected find, there 1.6 million movies, we don't need threads started for each one.
The interesting oddities are fine to post, or those where you have a serious question.
But just because you are excited because you THINK you found something doesn't mean we all need a new thread. Its not practical to do this, and it bogs down the forum with yet more trivia.
Just my grumpy 2 cents....
whole project stats??
just wondering if the stardust team is going to put up some stats for the whole project... like: number of tiles scanned, number of tiles quality checked, number of tracks found, % complete and all that jazz. would be nice to see how fast the project is progressing. the individual stats are quite good though.
~peter
~peter
"The Earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever."
~Konstantin Tsiolkovsky
~Konstantin Tsiolkovsky
-
- DustMod
- Posts: 694
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:12 pm
- Location: Horsetown, USA
I agree with the icebike, if every (currently +/-7000) user posted their finds, we would be drowning right now... but it seems a number of people just can't help themselves- so if Orion's idea can limit these to a small number of topics that everyone can post and view as they please without extending the topic list to 17 pages, I'm all for it!
No dessert for you- ONE MONTH!
-
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:17 pm
lol I too would rather not see them, but I suspect curbing the enthusiasm won't fly so I suggested the organisation. Most of the "look at this" I don't bother with now. Unless it's ballerinas with no heads and dogs. I've actually been writing down some amusing ones... haven't got to posting them yet. I have an awesome one of a gargoyle eating the Eiffel tower.
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.
-
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:17 pm
I'd like to see a way to look at calibrations that I failed on, to see what it was I missed, to hopefully learn to do better in the future. I don't always see that the failed calibration counter has incremented until later - so have no easy way to go back to review what happened - or where I may have gone wrong.
Try your Back button.sriley wrote:I'd like to see a way to look at calibrations that I failed on, to see what it was I missed, to hopefully learn to do better in the future. I don't always see that the failed calibration counter has incremented until later - so have no easy way to go back to review what happened - or where I may have gone wrong.
But seriously, you are doing well to not fixate on the counters. Just do your best on each movie, and the counters will take care of themselves.
Everybody misses a few.