A Big Congrats to artman40!
-
by jdebes scientist, admin
Dear All,
Please stand up and give a virtual round of applause to @artman40, who has through heroic effort, classified everything within the first set of data we've delivered. This amounts to more than 30,000 classifications by @artman40 alone, accounting for roughly 6% of the total number of classifications done for the project to date.
While artman40 rests a little bit, we're on track to getting more data to everyone pretty soon!
Posted
-
Way to go @artman40 with your 30,000 and my 3333 we have kick the stars out of the galaxies. lol
Posted
-
by Artman40
You're too kind.
Is that true that classification is more helpful for objects that are not obvious stars? I have noticed that those objects which are obvious stars rarely meet the good candidate criteria on the project and have to be pointed out and added to collections separately to avoid false negatives.Plus, I think there are others which have classified over 30000 objects, too. In addition some of mine were duplicates due to glitches.
Posted
-
uh-oh : the question is : Do you throw unneeded nails back into the bucket of mixed nails just to be laboriously resorted later or do you sort them into babyfood jars to get to them easier next time? I told my wife that @artman40 is scientist in cognitoe to spur exciting stuff; would truly love to know your professional background. I admire a person of your thought process and knowledge.
Posted
-
by Artman40
This analogy is confusing. Anyway, I am not a professional. I just have nothing else productive to do aside from maybe other Zooniverse projects.
Posted
-
by abans scientist, moderator
Hi @artman40!
Congrats on the classifications! Also about what you said
"I have noticed that those objects which are obvious stars rarely meet the good candidate criteria on the project and have to be pointed out and added"We are trying to amend this so that people agree on these being good objects, we think the average user is getting thrown off by diffraction spikes/artifacts of bright sources. If they look like stars and have IR excess they indeed are good candidates.. and since they are so bright they are also great targets for follow-up. So your classifications of these objects are very worthwhile!
Posted
-
by Artman40
Of course, saturated stars in high resolution images look even less round and more like ejected shells.
I also noticed that false negatives for non-saturated stars could also happen due to some of the images being vertically stretched (especially images in blue light), making them not look round.Posted
-
by Pini2013 translator, moderator
Congrats @artman40 !!! You are the "top detective artman40" now. And I noticed that you have a fan !!! (¬‿¬)
Posted
-
by TED91 moderator
Congrats @artman40. I admire your amazing effort. I managed to classify only halfway compared to you. 😃
Posted
-
by abans scientist, moderator in response to artman40's comment.
@artman40, yes, I've also noticed some potential false asymmetries due to stretched images... I'm not sure what we can do to help the average user overcome that particular issue, but it's good that super users like you have picked up on these trends!
Posted
-
by Artman40
@ TED91 congratulations! 15000+ is a very good effort put into classification!
Posted
-
by voyager1682002 moderator
Congratulations to the two great Disk Detectives @artman40 and @TED91!! 😃
Posted
-
by Pini2013 translator, moderator
Congrats to @miltonbosch, another of our "super detectives", he has classified 30,500 objects !!! 😃
Posted
-
by Artman40
Congratulations as well. How many classification each object has on average by now?
Posted
-
by Pini2013 translator, moderator in response to artman40's comment.
I have great news:we hit 500,000 classifications today in Disk Detective 😃
This can give us an idea, but I'm not sure about how many times we need each image classified.Posted
-
by voyager1682002 moderator
Big congratulations to @miltonbosch!
Posted
-
by Artman40
We have to change the title of this topic to recognize everyone who has made a lot of contribution.
Posted
-
I vote no to title change
Posted
-
by Shigeru moderator
Wow! Congratulations! @artman40 I'm in 4392, so still a long way to go!
About the post idea... maybe a post with a rank for the top contributors?
Posted
-
by Shigeru moderator
And just now noticed @miltonbosch after re-reading the post, congratulations!
Posted
-
by arvintan
Is it me or have all the good candidates already been swept? I haven't seen any untagged good ones for a while now.
Posted
-
by Artman40
Considering that there have been over 500 000 (Since last time the amount was announced. It now is probably almost 600 000) classifications but only slightly more than 30 000 objects have been on display, it's likely. That makes it almost 20 classifications per object.
Posted