Will Grading accuracy be better in Phase II ????

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

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Post Reply
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:39 am
Location: home

Will Grading accuracy be better in Phase II ????

Post by ERSTRS »

Stardust Team,

In Phase II, will the accuracy of your grading system be improved? If not, then how will new members learn the difference between tracks, inclusions and dust particles?

When I first joined in Aug. 2006, I paid close attention to how you graded my answers. Those you listed as Correct went into one folder and the “Incorrectsâ€
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 12:06 am

Post by SIGINT1 »

I have read many comments like the one above. I am not picking on this one particular one but am just using it as an example as Phase I draws to a close to express my PERSONAL opinion.

First I am not a person that has any what you would call professional experience with space. I am just an average guy trying to get along in life. I have always had a fascination about all things scientific and in nature. I have an inquisitive mind. I joined this project because I thought that as a group we were trying to help those who are professionals and trained in the matters of interstellar dust particiles cut down on the time they might have to spend looking for these particles and point them in the direction where they might be located so they could look at them with their trained and knowing eyes and knowledge. I for one am proud to have assisted in this endeavor! If one of the items I selected turns out to be a particle so much the better. If not I still had a hell of a lot of fun and saw some really interesting things. Some wise person once stated words to the effect that: "It is amazing what can be acomplished by a group when everyone in that group works together and no one cares who gets the credit for accomplishing the overall task". I am fortunate to be in the top 100 - but even if I wasn't as I prevoulsy said- I have had a lot of fun contributing to what I feel is an extremely worthwhile task. I really don't care what my final score is for I am in competition with absolutely no one - I viewed each CM as refresher training to keep me focused - if I have helped accomplish this hurculean task then I am satisified. I feel that the contribution of the person with the lowest score is no less important than mine and I commend that person and all the others for the efforts they put forth. I am sure the effort is not lost on those in charge of this project.

I am looking forward to Phase II and all it may bring and you can be sure that I will be contributing to the group effort.

Rank - Who Cares??

Joe King
Reno Nevada

Live Long and Prosper
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:39 am
Location: home

Will grading accuracy be better.....SIGINT1

Post by ERSTRS »


My main point was too subtle. That is, being graded wrong consistently may so discourage and confuse the duster that he/she becomes ineffective. It almost did that to me. In Oct. 2006, I got charged with seven "errors" close together, all recorded wrong I found out later. At the time, I thought I knew how to recognize a track. I had found out by trial and error. Each time I clicked on what I thought was a track and my score went up, I knew I had it right. If I clicked on one and was penalized a point, then I knew it was not a track. When I found out that I'd been scored wrong, my confidence took a plunge that nearly made me give up. My Rank was in the 600s at the time. I carefully studied the supposed "wrong" answers, comparing them with those that had been scored right, and could see no difference. I was confused, because I assumed that the Stardust Team had been scoring me correctly. So, I sent some of the ones in question off to another member of the Team, and found out that they really were tracks, and that they should have been counted as such. The Stardust Team was making errors in scoring! I was floored! Now, I ask you: How will you determine what the new tracks in Phase II look like? Everytime you click on one and it comes up wrong, can you be sure it really is wrong? Or right?

As to being interested in Scores and Ranks, that issue has been addressed (as you said) many times on the Forums. Stardust Team's answer has always been that Scoring and Rankings is the only way they can determine the ability of the duster. We are judged by the Scores we obtain.

But, my main concern in Phase II is: How could I learn to identify a real particle if the Scoring system is askew? If I can't identify a real particle, then I am useless to the project. The only way I know how to recognize a particle is by trial and error----through the Scoring system.

Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:04 pm
Location: bergen, netherlands


Post by marcia »


I totally agree with you (see my 'determine detection threshold' in this forum). In fase 1 I learned what a real track was by the CM's, and although it's pure speculation what this new CM's will become, I'm very worried if the team says they are going to use ‘subtle candidate tracks found by the dusters'. If this are absolutely real tracks, than it's no problem at all, I will learn to recognize them, but if they are not... I can't learn from them... and my frustration will rise high... I'm especially worried because, apart from the LAT's, I didn't see nowhere on the forum movies of ‘normal’ tracks I would call ‘tracks’. May be I missed them all, that's possible, but that's why I so dearly like to see an example.
I hope my worries will be proved completely superfluous, and that I can contribute to phase 2 with the same joy and interest I did for the whole last year...

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

Post by jsmaje »

SIGINT1 - well said.

And Marcia - I entirely agree about the promised 'new CMs', having said here that "I'm not sure that the new hi-res calibrations Bryan mentions, based on as yet unproven features, will necessarily be of much value". We shall see.

More importantly, to ERSTRS:
Evelyn, can you not reconsider your decision to retire from Stardust? Among others, your search efforts and contributions to these forums have been an inspiration to me. It would be a shame that if as the result of a few CM scoring errors your enthusiasm and analytical experience were to be lost to the project (as it happens, I've never encountered any scoring errors at all - luck or something to do with one's internet service?)
Come on - you know you want to...!


PS: SIGINT1 = joking48 = Joe King?
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Woodbridge, CT

Post by cthiker »

jsmaje wrote:...And Marcia - I entirely agree about the promised 'new CMs', having said here that "I'm not sure that the new hi-res calibrations Bryan mentions, based on as yet unproven features, will necessarily be of much value". We shall see.
Well taken, John (and Marcia)!

While I can certainly vouch for the fact that these new CMs are much more challenging, I am picking up stuff I didn't before. I have just a few dozen Phase-II movies under my belt and I already have 3 missed CMs :cry: (I viewed over 5,000 movies in Phase-I with only 2 missed CMs in all!). However, I'm beginning to see some of the things in these CMs that I had not noticed before - like seeing objects that I would have thought were inclusions in Phase-I but now notice that their "movement" (as objects move across a diagonal as you focus) were in opposition to the other objects in the CM. Sure enough, that bought me two catches that I would have missed otherwise (indeed, did so twice before).

Will it be the right thing to look for in the long haul? Don't really know at this point, but I'm taking the cues for now as best I can and ignoring the S/S scores.

And, Evelyn...I'm voting with John on this one... :D

Happy Dusting (the Sequel)!
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 7:22 pm
Location: Clarkson, NY

Phase II calibration movies

Post by outthere »

I have always looked at the "calibration movies" in phase I as a teaching tool. Each time I missed on I would review it to understand why. I am very discouraged already with Phase II. I find the "calibration movies" to be inconsistent and too subtle. Inconsistent because very similar tracks give opposite results. Sometimes they are tracks, sometimes they aren't. Too subtle because I cannot figure out where the track actually is. I would prefer that if a "calibration movie" is missed/or not we can review it with the track highlighted and an explanation why it is a track.
Post Reply