Spotting 'Cheaters'- 8/16

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

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Gael
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 8:30 am
Location: Fairfax VA

Spotting 'Cheaters'- 8/16

Post by Gael »

Here is what I have posted in the forums. Did you ever think it was possible. that persons may display observational characteristics that are different?

Please READ.

"On another thread this evening I found a note about finding so-called 'cheaters', which is apparently why I was removed from the top 15 rankings after much hard work. Here is my reply to Buttorworth: A"fter viewing several thousand movies, I became frustrated with poor response time from the pc for loading the next movie. I would wait and wait. While waiting, and having plenty of time to look, I noticed that there are splash circlets, of very light , VERY light shades of grey. Concentric circles, irregular. I am observant and have a good eye. Like a stone throne into water, particles are leaving ripples as shades of grey in what we see online. Would we could see color! Very subtle ripples of grey, but there. I discovered that upon the instant of seeing the initial phase of a movie, I could evaluate presence of splash/ripples and thus a PARTICLE, and reject it or explore it. My specificity is 99.93%, and the other about 95%. I do not waste time on waiting for the next movie to fully load when I do not see the tell-tale ripple. I click No-Track and move on. I am too quick and I do press no-track if I am not fully engaged./distracted That happens. I accept it and move on, although I slap my head and yell 'D'oh!'!. By profession I am a tester. I am trained to look for in/consistencies and discrepancies in results. I am very good at what I do. This is not cheating, but something you did not expect. Someone who can instantly spot potential for a track, and who knows immediately when there is no potential - or when there IS. Sincerely yours, Gailod
JOC
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:59 pm

Post by JOC »

Gael/gailod wrote:I discovered that upon the instant of seeing the initial phase of a movie, I could evaluate presence of splash/ripples and thus a PARTICLE, and reject it or explore it.
As you may now realise, your 'discovery' is a fiction. Perhaps you can start over and relearn how the project works and contribute something useful to it.

All you described above is either your incapacity for understanding or your method of fraud. One way or the other, your efforts on the the project have not matched those of the many capable, honest people whose results remain.
Twinkle, twinkle, little dust!
How I wonder which to trust!
From stars above the world you fell!
Buried like treasure in aerogel.
cgore82
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:20 am
Location: Columbia, SC, USA

Post by cgore82 »

Call me crazy, but I'm guessing there's a reason why the stardust team felt it was necessary to be able to focus up and down on each movie...
jsmaje
Posts: 616
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 8:39 am
Location: Manchester UK

Re: Spotting 'Cheaters'- 8/16

Post by jsmaje »

Gael wrote:I do not waste time on waiting for the next movie to fully load when I do not see the tell-tale ripple.
I agree with JOC and cgore82 - see my reply to your posting on the official Issue & Status thread.
trainspotter
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:41 am

Seems valid to me

Post by trainspotter »

Don't be hateful. I tried it. Ripples indicate a track in every case. It's pretty cool. Why wouldn't this work for calibration and real movies both? Just curious. Thanks.
WindBlower
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:48 am

Post by WindBlower »

Dear Gael

I am sorry that these 'so-called cleaver people' arent that Humane, as they apperently they themselves think.
As long as You know the truth, then forget their ignorance and such, people today,,, really.... so so sad

I am sorry that they deleted you.

Sincerely,
WindBlower
Jwb52z
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:05 am

Post by Jwb52z »

What some people like Gael don't understand is that we are INSTRUCTED TO USE A CERTAIN PROCEDURE. It does NOT MATTER WHAT YOU THINK that YOU can do. Sorry for the "screaming" but seriously, some people people want to get around the rules and instructions because they automatically think they know THE way to do something.
Sharqua
DustMod
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 1:02 am
Location: Bradenton, FL

Re: Spotting 'Cheaters'- 8/16

Post by Sharqua »

Gael wrote:"On another thread this evening I found a note about finding so-called 'cheaters', which is apparently why I was removed from the top 15 rankings after much hard work. Here is my reply to Buttorworth: A"fter viewing several thousand movies, I became frustrated with poor response time from the pc for loading the next movie. I would wait and wait. While waiting, and having plenty of time to look, I noticed that there are splash circlets, of very light , VERY light shades of grey. Concentric circles, irregular. I am observant and have a good eye. Like a stone throne into water, particles are leaving ripples as shades of grey in what we see online. Would we could see color! Very subtle ripples of grey, but there. I discovered that upon the instant of seeing the initial phase of a movie, I could evaluate presence of splash/ripples and thus a PARTICLE, and reject it or explore it. My specificity is 99.93%, and the other about 95%. I do not waste time on waiting for the next movie to fully load when I do not see the tell-tale ripple. I click No-Track and move on. I am too quick and I do press no-track if I am not fully engaged./distracted That happens. I accept it and move on, although I slap my head and yell 'D'oh!'!. By profession I am a tester. I am trained to look for in/consistencies and discrepancies in results. I am very good at what I do. This is not cheating, but something you did not expect. Someone who can instantly spot potential for a track, and who knows immediately when there is no potential - or when there IS. Sincerely yours, Gailod
[/rant on]

Gailod,

The tell-tale ripple you are referring to is a well-known indicator of a fake calibration movie.

All you are proving with your speed is your ability to spot fake tracks.

I can spot a fake track in under 2 seconds, too. It's easy -- I've seen so many of them that I don't even need to examine the movie, or know that its number is in the 10000 range, or anything else. I could easily click through the ones that don't show these tell-tale ripples, out-scoring everyone here. I have a high-speed machine and a high-speed connection. Heck, I can even see the 9-square-pixel tracks that they try to hide in the ultra-rare "Very Difficult" movies within two seconds of the instant they load.

But that's not the point. Those tracks are FAKE! You are wasting your time and energy, and that of the Stardust Team, by assuming that these ripply images are what they are looking for. They're not. The real movies are of much higher quality.

What the Stardust team needs you to do is do your thing with the ripply calibration movies, merely proving that you are paying attention. Then spend all of your time on the REAL movies. Slide the focus bar up and down. Look for the inclusions until they ask us not to. Watch for weird stuff, which they are asking for. Watch for the ultra-rare real tracks.

I'm sorry to say that I must support the Stardust team in saying that you are not proceeding correctly if you are only spending 2-3 seconds per movie. Having done quite a bit of astronomy image-flashing, which is quite close to what we are doing here, I can say from experience that you should be spending no less than 15-20 seconds on the complex/cluttered images, examining them in quadrants... and spend at least long enough to locate the surface on the perfectly clean ones. I cannot locate the surface on a near-featureless image in anything under 10 seconds, and I am of genius-level intelligence with 20/10 (perfect) vision on a high-quality monitor.

This is my tuppence, not that of the Stardust team. If you think you've been jipped, it's because you weren't doing it right, not because you're that good. You aren't, trust me. These images are too complex, and the human brain incapable of capturing that much data and processing it in 2 seconds flat.

-Shar
[/rant off]

p.s. I hope you find this helpful.
kari
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:31 pm

Re: Spotting 'Cheaters'- 8/16

Post by kari »

Sharqua wrote: p.s. I hope you find this helpful.
I did .. thank you! You managed to express what many of us are thinking (at least I think so ;)).

:!:
icebike

Post by icebike »

cgore82 wrote:Call me crazy, but I'm guessing there's a reason why the stardust team felt it was necessary to be able to focus up and down on each movie...
:lol:

Ya Think?
gamalmfalyii
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 7:46 am
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: Seems valid to me

Post by gamalmfalyii »

trainspotter wrote:Don't be hateful. I tried it. Ripples indicate a track in every case. It's pretty cool. Why wouldn't this work for calibration and real movies both? Just curious. Thanks.
Because random particles caught in a natural setting are quite different from the Van Der Graaf dust accelerator which shot many of the calibration particles into Aerogel for the testing. How is it being hateful? It's just aggrivating when it's been said 400 times that we will not know what the "real" tracks will look like until confirmed and publicized by the team and people STILL ask the same questions.

P.S. and I quote from the tutorial session page;

"They may be deeper or shallower, wider or narrower. We will see once we have the first few examples of real interstellar dust!"
"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"
jsmaje
Posts: 616
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 8:39 am
Location: Manchester UK

Re: Seems valid to me

Post by jsmaje »

trainspotter wrote:Don't be hateful. I tried it. Ripples indicate a track in every case. It's pretty cool. Why wouldn't this work for calibration and real movies both? Just curious. Thanks.
Good grief! When will some people realise that these well-known "ripples" are simply an artefact of the lower resolution calibration movies with known tracks. Yes, you must click them to "score", but if you then make no effort to look for unknown tracks (which will be in the higher resolution real movies WITHOUT obvious ripples) then you are completely wasting your time. Not exactly "cheating" maybe, but clearly a lazy misconception which is of no use to man nor beast, and the Admins were quite right to scrub such non-efforts.

I doubt that these "ripples" are anything of the sort anyway, at least the sort you get when dropping a stone into water: note that they rarely actually surround the track...perhaps due to uneven surfaces and lighting conditions (plus the low-resolution pixellation).

Please, could people take more time to read the forums and apply a little intelligent thought before shooting off such blanks.
For starters, read DustMod Sharqua's excellent advice above.
trainspotter
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:41 am

Don't Be Hateful!

Post by trainspotter »

Look at the comments here - most are rude and mean spirited, far from civil or even intelligent. So - don't be hateful! That behavior is not helpful at all, except for Sharqua's which was kind of helpful. But no one needs to rant to make a point.

I'm thinking now it would be a good idea to do away with the rankings completely, and after viewing 100 movies or so get rid of the calibration movies too. If the real tracks we might find may not be anything like the calibration movie as Sharqua says, then why have them? It trains a person to look for movies that conform to the calibration type. The idea was to help us to focus and pay attention by having calibration movies. But if that is just helping us to focus on something that may not exist, I'd rather not have them. And the rankings just encourage competition, not track finding.
PolyMath
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:08 am

Re: Don't Be Hateful!

Post by PolyMath »

trainspotter wrote:Look at the comments here - most are rude and mean spirited, far from civil or even intelligent. So - don't be hateful! That behavior is not helpful at all, except for Sharqua's which was kind of helpful. But no one needs to rant to make a point.
I didn't see any mean spirited comments. I did see a general annoyance with the people who are only trying to get high scores, not only should their scores be erased but they should be banned from the project.
TimStrange
DustMod
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:12 am
Location: Third stone from the Sun

Post by TimStrange »

I will try to be helpful and not mean, don't mistake my sarcasm and humor for meanness. I'm assuming you were not trying to cheat, just trying to do the best you could as fast as you could.
I discovered that upon the instant of seeing the initial phase of a movie, I could evaluate presence of splash/ripples and thus a PARTICLE, and reject it or explore it.
Congratulations! You've found a very quick way to identify calibration movies! Now what did you do with movies that did not have these ripples (the real ones)? Did you just click no track quickly, and move on to the next?

I think you see my point. Points reset, try again, no harm done, say woops.
Post Reply