Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Marking for Science or for yourself?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2007

    Marking for Science or for yourself?

    An idea just occured to me. If you were a selfish person and your only purpose in performing this Citizen Scientist project was to get your name "in lights", i.e to get your name as co-discoverer of a KBO, what would your best strategy be? Well, it would obviously be to mark every single thing which might have even the slightest chance of turning out to be a KBO. There is afterall no penalty for marking many blobs which no one else marks.

    This thought occured to me because in this second image set I'm marking at least twice as many blobs as in image set 1 (probably because there is no toggle button). And it doesn't matter if I mark a blob as a transient or as an asteroid, it is always "confirmed", even when I mark it as a transient in one version of the image and as an asteroid in another version of the same image.

    1. What is your experience with this image set? Do you get almost every marking "confirmed"?
    2. Should there be any kind of penalty for anyone marking every bright pixel and its grandmother?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Hjorted Sweden
    My experience with the new image set is good. Not all that I mark is confirmed but many are. I believe that many are confirmed at the previous picture set but need more data to confirm its orbit.

    my answer to 2 is Why? how is this a problem? We are looking fore bright pixels and are relying on crowd sourcing.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    I think that for Question #2, a solution could probably be user/classification weighting, e.g. by introducing simulations and weighting people's classifications accordingly.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Hy to all, for the question n. 2, if i would see 5 or more blobs ( sometimes it's very difficult to evidence them) in the same image i'll signal all these for not loosing the possibility to have watched a KBO candidate.
    Then the team has the possibility to correct this fact with the number of who has signaled the same object.
    E.G. when one object is signaled by 8 people or more, the team could considers that object;
    if,on the contrary, there were only 8 signals or under this number, the team could not consider that object.
    Without any penalty in my opinion.
    I'm sorry for my awful english.
    Cheers Gonano.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    I believe that many people are in front of the picture settings to confirm, but more data are needed to confirm its orbit

Similar Threads

  1. Crater marking to much or not enough
    By Placidstorm in forum Moon Mappers
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 2012-Jul-04, 05:30 PM
  2. Crater marking feedback msg
    By natattack in forum Moon Mappers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2012-Jul-02, 03:52 PM
  3. Too much crater marking
    By matthewny in forum Moon Mappers
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2012-Jun-27, 05:51 AM
  4. BA marking scheme
    By Glom in forum Small Media at Large
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 2004-Jan-14, 04:02 PM
  5. Shuttle SRB Marking Schemes?
    By Firefox in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2003-May-11, 04:19 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts