I don't found any post about Stardust@Home so I created a new thread.
Stardust@Home is a distributed search by volunteers for interstellar dust in the Stardust interstellar dust collector.
Volunteers have to pre-register for an expected start in spring of 2006. You will also have to pass a test to be qualified for the search.
Indeed, unlike the distributed computer projects running in background tasks, this project is using your eyes to scan "focus movies" thanks to a Virtual Microscope.
According to estimations, there should be about 45 interstellar dust impacts in the collector.
Besides the satisfaction of contributing actively to this sample return project, your name will appear as a co-author on the paper announcing the discovery of the particle.
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/
Rakhir
Looks fun. What do they mean though when they say "Not even one contemporary interstellar dust grain has ever been studied in the laboratory"? Were old grains found somewhere?
http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/April00/analyzingSmall.html
has some good information. I think what they mean by contemporary is "recent". Grains studied so far have been from meteorites etc, dating back to the birth of the solar system.
Pre-registered and ready for action.
I think this is an excellent opportunity for UMSF members to actively participate in a research project. Ok it is a monotonous search for a tiny mote of dust, but much science is just like that, and just think how you will feel if you are one of those who found one of the 45.
Nick
Is there some sort of explanation from the Stardust team why this detection cannot be done by a computer program scanning the images? Are the marks left by interstellar dust so unpredictable that human work is needed? How does the person know what to look for then?
I'd imagine that the trail would just be longer because of higher velocity of interstellar particles, so it seems strange that this couldn't be detected by a machine.
Anyhow, I already signed for the job anyway :-)
It's probably cheaper to get people to do it than write some software to do it
Especialyl when the people are a) free and
plentiful ![]()
There's going to be some 'training' images before you're allowed to do real ones as I understand it, to make sure you know what you're doing
It reminds me of the Mars crater counting on 'clickworkers'
Doug
stardust@home
please be mac compatible please be mac compatible please be mac compatible please be mac compatible please be mac compatible please be mac compatible
that is all.
I did WAYYYyy too much crater clicking...it was strangely addictive.
I'm guessing the 'movies' refered to in that TPS article are a pull of focus thru the gel?
Doug
I registered with Stardust@home as soon as its existence was revealed on the forum, here. I've yet to hear anything at all back from them.
Has anyone heard from them? Or did they only take the first couple of thousand applications, and I'm SOL?
-the other Doug
No news yet - I doubt they'll send out emails for the 'test' until they have proper imagery ready to go - so end of this month, beginning of next I'd guess
Doug
Well, with Stardust (finally) at home... I remember reading something that the rest of the capsule might be displayed at the Natioanl Air & Space Museum in Washington D.C.
TPS members will be pleased to see that you can now do the 'beta' testing phase - interface is actually very good, I'm enjoying it.
An LPSC abstract on the results from the first test of Stardust@Home's likely reliability shows promising results: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2006/pdf/2225.pdf . (There's also a description of it from the previous year's LPSC: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2005/pdf/1908.pdf .)
In a bag...
To be fair, the samples may be scrap, but the aeroshell is recognisable - but I don't think they'd want to display it by any stretch of the imagination. It would be like exhibiting the dent in your bumper before getting an insurance quote for your car.
Doug
I passed the Stardust@Home training, 10/10
I finally received an e-mail saying that Stardust@home is launching. The e-mail gave a link to the Berkeley people who operate the various distributed processing projects out there.
Unfortunately, the site is non-functional -- the banner links to actually get started working on the project aren't working (aren't even links, are just plain text), and the message says that the website might be either slow or unresponsive because of the high volume of traffic.
I'm hoping the links start working in the next day or two -- I'm anxious to get started!
-the other Doug
Got that e-mail last night too - And after celebrating finally our national holiday (pang, boom, whoosh...
) I was able to pass the test about the ten VM-movies and then to create an account (and to print my Planetary Society Certificate
).
Actually I had to start with the test twice because the website also went down for some time. Then later I was able to log in and start with some real VM-movies (1...25) until I got a lock-out again.
As far as I can see I only found (or got the) tracks in the sporadical appearing calibrated movies and ranked (circa) on the 350 of 1880 place...
An hacker attack ongoing?!?
Hi Rob, welcome to UMSF!
Statistic for "greuti":
Calibration Movies Answered Correctly 471
Calibration Movies Answered Incorrectly 3
Your Overall Score: 468
Total Real Movies Viewed: 1230
Your Rank: 45 out of 5641
Specificity: 100%
Sensitivity: 99%
It seems to be a form of race
There're some searchers with a lower score in front of me - I guess they've still no failings
Slowly I need a real feeling of success by finding a real (new) track instead of these calibration movies... I hope that's already a real search and not merely another screening of serious searchers...
1230 Movies! You should have some events there, click the "My events" tab. If I found 5 possibles in 300, you shluld have more after 1230....
Yes I clicked two at the beginning (status "Indeterminate" too), but meantime I think that aren't real tracks or particles (later I've still found more of them without clicking on).
What I find is that a lot of movies are not in good focus (with little scope below the surface). In such movies you wouldn't see the track as defined ring but at most as faint dark spot or a form of shadow.
The stardust info I read said that there were expected to be "several dozen" particles trapped in the collector. If there are about 100 particles to be viewed in the eventual 700,000 focus movies, that would be about one per 7,000 movies. It would be a shame to view thousands of movies and then miss the one particle that was present in them.
I recall there were to be test movies presented every so often similar to the instructional movies containing examples of particles. I wonder how often. I would think there are more test particle images than real particles scattered amongst the movies. I wonder if they will tell you if you have identified a test particle image.
If you click on a movie (test or real) including a track and your score dosen't increase then you probably found a new track. Btw. the adress in your browser shows (so far) whether it's a test movie or a real movie
@dilo, fortunately, I work currently temporary
By the way, they advertise on the site that you will get 20% test movies.
Statistics for robreeve
Your Overall Score: 117
Total Movies Viewed: 524
Your Rank: 1062 out of 6476
Specificity: 100%
Sensitivity: 88%
Movie 39071 21 3 Indeterminate
Movie 20962 21 4 Indeterminate
Movie 41699 30 6 Indeterminate
Movie 43214 26 8 Indeterminate
Movie 22712 24 3 Indeterminate
Movie 41954 17 4 Indeterminate
Movie 41322 32 6 Indeterminate
Heh, here's my stats - just signed up:
Your Rank: 65535 out of 6543
Specificity: unknown
Sensitivity: unknown
How's that for an ego hit when your rank is so far below the number of participants!
This is fun, and not too bad on my dialup connection. The movies are taking ~3 minutes to come down, so it's not too bad. It'll take a while to get up over 1000, though.
I took you comment obout the URL telling test or real - and almosst immediately, got one that said real, found an obvious hit, and then my test hit went up by one. Looks like maybe they're onto ppl.
Did somone noticed these 3 small particles (light blue arrows) which appear always focused in all movies.
Finally got in and going, myself. Had an interesting one -- didn't take a screen cap or anything, since I just go along, give it my best shot, and go on to the next...
Anyway, there was one image that appeared to be pretty flat (no big slope on the subject), but two very, very small dark spots, maybe 1.5 microns or so based on the scale bar, came into focus at the deepest level. No track visible in any way, just a dark spot deep inside the aerogel. I marked the bigger of the two spots as a track, but that was a really soft identification.
I've also run across several images that do come into focus, but the perfect surface focus point is at the deepest focus setting on the adjustment bar. I reported those as "bad focus," since I figure the point of the exercise is to zoom your focus down into the aerogel. Any movie that doesn't let you get below the surface is, I figure, guilt of a focus problem.
Are y'all seeing the same kind of things?
Seems like almost all of the tracks I've seen are the ones in the test images... though my scoresheet says I've identified something like six tracks, and while a couple of them only have corroboration by one or two other people (out of 20 to 30 views), some of them have been pegged by a dozen or more people.
It's fun, and I feel like I'm actually doing something useful!
-the other Doug
Doug, if you like to show what you've marked/stored in your "My Events" then you can copy the URL like this:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?movie_id=43887
I think it shows something similar to that you've described...
Above we've already touched on the focus problem. I report those as "bad focus" too - there're a real lot of them
@dilo, I noticed they too. It's first something confusing but they do not change their form.
Seeing as we are posting stats....
My rank hasn't changed in ages. Guess I'm an average user so I stay pretty static.
Your Overall Score: 82
Total Movies Viewed: 283
Your Rank: 2697 out of 6787
Specificity: 100%
Sensitivity: 100%
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?movie_id=45071 41 3 Indeterminate
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?movie_id=32403 16 1 Indeterminate
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?movie_id=20236 29 3 Indeterminate
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?movie_id=34526 29 2 Indeterminate
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?movie_id=54510 46 1 Indeterminate
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?movie_id=44387 32 7 Indeterminate
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?movie_id=20324 35 6 Indeterminate
I'm having a terrible time with bad focus images. I've done maybe 100 "movies" and at least a third have the surface in focus WAY far away from the center of the slider bar. Some movies are so devoid of any features at all that I can't tell if I'm actually looking at different images or if the javascript has frozen up and I'm stuck on the same one. If we're looking for ~10 tracks in ~1 MILLION images I have little hope the method will deliver real results with this kind of performance. The images should contain a reticle fiducial like this which rests on the srface so the viewer can see immediately where the surface is.
It looks to me like all they've done is get a block of aerogel under the microscope, focus to the surface and tell the autoscanner/imager "ok here's the surface, scan the whole block assuming this level at xx microns will be where the surface is" regarless of surface level deviation, when what they should be doing is surface level calibrating every movie made by using a little piece of software to see where the highest contrast is (like a digital camera does) and or using a small/thin surface fiducial at the image edge. Also Dilo is right about those dots that appear on every image, it makes me think they didn't even flatfield calibrate the CCD on the imager before they started!! not good. On the other hand the user interface is pretty nice and natural to use.
Something about the small dark spots below the surface:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=476
@About the huge amount of "bad focus" movies, I bet they are working already on a better solution to approach and scan again those positions - a lot additional work though.
@Rob, its not needed to quote the lot when you reply right after it.
Warning!
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=473&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
It cost me at least 5 points with the same growing of my incorrect answers and a clean 100% 100%!
And it's not yet well fixed so far!
It's not important for the search - but angry for my glory ;-)
I've had quite a few failed calibration movies (15) which I've looked at exhaustively and have not been able to 1. find my mistake or 2. I found the freaking track and got it wrong anyway. I stopped paying attention to that score, too fustrating to track; If they can't get it right I'm not going to worry anymore.
However, I can't help but wonder about the overall impact on the project, i.e.if ppl don't pay attention to their score, the testing program becomes ineffective, and quality control metrics go in the tank.
Your Overall Score: 210
Total Movies Viewed: 870
Your Rank: 925 out of 8146
Specificity: 100%
Sensitivity: 88%
Movie 39071 37 4 Indeterminate
Movie 20962 36 5 Indeterminate
Movie 41699 52 11 Indeterminate
Movie 43214 47 16 Indeterminate
Movie 22712 55 3 Indeterminate
Movie 41954 52 12 Indeterminate
Movie 41322 62 10 Indeterminate
Movie 43323 66 7 Indeterminate
Movie 41590 53 11 Indeterminate
Movie 41491 60 2 Indeterminate
Movie 44039 36 4 Indeterminate
Stardust-at-home's early travails have made it into Nature:
http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060731/full/060731-10.html
tty
Very strange structure on movie 845194V1:
Yea, there're some odd structures appearing at times. I guess it could be such a thing that according http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ss_tutorial.php?schedule_number=5 are not well-understood so far.
@about the calibration movies which had incorrect coordinates in them for the locations of the tracks (and gave you an incorrect answer back). Now it seems definitely fixed since monday. Also all movies got new IDs since then. So behind your first 10'000 movies, there should be no more impact to your score list
(if you've scanned correctly through all of them)
Andrew Westphal is "glogging" for Emily this week. Check out his http://www.planetary.org/blog/article/00000674/.
sorry about the flood...
Yeah, I just caught up with her blog today and noticed his informative entry. I wish he would have given a little more practical information for us searchers. After viewing a bunch of movies I am still a bit confused about some things. Still, his glog entry is the best so far. The first guy was, well, how should I put it? I'll bite my tongue. The second was better, but still not on the mark of what I had come to expect from Emily. If Andrew fills us in with some better information than the stardust@home site and forum has so far provided, he'll be a big hit with me. I think we all are waiting for one of the gloggers yet to come. I haven't found one, but is there a thread on that topic yet? I was going to start one several times, but chickened out.
It's unfortunate that we haven't been given more guidance as this stardust thing has developed. Almost all of the anomalies I've seen have been inclusions that come to focus below the surface. One thing that is a real mystery to me is why all of the calibration tracks appear in focus only below the aerogel surface. I can understand why they remain in focus below the surface, but shouldn't they start _at_ the surface?
Anyway, so far I am tagging anything that comes to a focus below an identifiable surface. There are a lot of others agreeing with my clicks, but I am sure they are not tracks. I haven't seen any real movies that resemble the calibration tracks. My search method is this... Evaluate the general focus of the movie, if possible identify the surface, determine the orientation of the surface (is it tilted in some direction, or does it have a more complex shape?), look for stuff that comes to a focus beneath any indentified surface.
I've been getting a bit burned out on the movie viewing lately. If we got some feedback from the officials regarding some real tracks found, I could find some new energy. It is tough to view a lot of movies on dialup at home, and using my broadband connection at work was seriously affecting my productivity there. I had to consider who was writing my paychecks.
I was hanging with the top 1000 until I had to make that hard decision. As for the top 100, I'll bite my tongue once more.
After 1400+ total movies viewed, my rank is now lagging. It seems a shame that ranking seems to depend only on total movies viewed. I would have thought accuracy should be part of the equation. I think they are giving users the wrong feedback. I really could care less about the ranking, but I really want to identify a track. Perhaps they are really serious when they say "expect the unexpected." Although they theoretically expected only about 45 tracks in the whole array, I can only guess that they have not positively identified one yet.
It hasn't been terribly active lately, but earlier there were more helpful comments posted in the freenode IRC channel #stardust@home...
My current stats, which are not changing much lately...
Calibration Movies Answered Correctly 339
Calibration Movies Answered Incorrectly 3
Your Overall Score: 336
Total Real Movies Viewed: 1082
Your Rank: 1351 out of 11176
Specificity: 100%
Sensitivity: 98%
I realize this post is probably more appropriate at the stardust@home forums, but they're still a bit of a mess, IMHO. So for my fellow UMSF dusters...
FYI - there's a new http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=879 over at the stardust@home forums about the "interesting candidates" discovered so far. The two highest scored movies they list have features in them that look just like tracks on the calibration movies - but it's way to early to tell for sure. But still, very cool!
Unfortunately most of my events are of the "black speck" variety, no soda-straws here yet
Yea, but in one of the two highest scored is the focus sure above the surface. There're many of such surface "circles"/structures among the movies.
The third is really interesting. If it's a track I wonder why it could broaden again.
(Edited: oops I guess it dosen't broaden, it's a focus issue)
Another interesting update: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=874
As expected but even so astoundingly few such "cheaters" among the top 200.
Now after a considerable quantity of searching, one observation is really a bit questionable to me: I'm sure I got several Real Movies at least twice
and had in addition some déjà vu feelings. So I wonder why happens that at all. Shouldn't be the system so designed that each movie is checked off to you when you've made a decision? Mainly in view of the huge amount of movies which are still to scan - and personally I don't feel like searching through twice
Some of my candidate movies have been checked and were found to be "Not Extraterrestrial" "inclusion". They are these dark spots that many others have spotted as well. So far I have only found such dark spots and I'm afraid that none of my candidates are of extraterrestrial origin.
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?id=3316648V1 158 40 Not Extraterrestrial inclusion
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?id=3799221V1 158 38 Not Extraterrestrial inclusions
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?id=4369380V1 169 37 Not Extraterrestrial inclusions
Michael
Hi Michael, nice to see you here!
Yea, these dark "particles/inclusions" were a "funny" Stardust@home "story"
Meantime I do no more click they too.
As far as I know, there're some possible tracks (even with the particle) but so far all like this example: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ss_tutorial.php?schedule_number=10
To find in the "I think I've found a track, what do you think?" thread:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=647
Btw. I found the following movie of my teeny "interplanetary sun-glider"
Such a possible track with the particle (that I found few days ago too in ~36 place): http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?id=433711V1
I just saw in "My Events" that it passed cut 1 and got the official comment "another IDP" (does anybody know what IDP means?).
odave, thanks for mentioning that update about the "interesting candidates." It's good to finally get some kind of feedback. I guess I'll stop selecting the inclusions also, but so far none of my movies have been reviewed yet.
From http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=879, it's Interplanetary Dust Particle. That is,
It is an impact track, almost certainly not interstellar. It's trajectory will tell us whether it is likely to be secondary ejecta from the Stardust spacecraft solar panels, or an Interplanetary Dust Particle (IDP).
The http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/definitions.php is the official glossary, but IDP hasn't made it on there yet - they are updating it as they go.
I've finally had one of my http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?id=2670554V1 get marked as reviewed - "passed cut 1: weird WCO" (Worth Checking Out), so they are making progress...
Oh yea, thanks! I've read that article, but it seems not complete
Btw, this movie appears currently in my Events as "159 / 41 / Passed cut 1 / another IDP".
Would say rather few of 159 that clicked on it.
There's a nice example of another type of impact track in the aerogel besides the straight tracks:
It seems there're no longer Starduster here
Odave (or someone else) what do you think of my interpretation I've posted there? (Also because I don't know how coherent my "English syntax" is)
Have a look at that image too that shows two tracks from particles which entered in the areogel by supersonic speed (which is also expected to interstellar particles): http://www.planetary.org/image/PIA02188.jpg
I agree with your interpretation of the tracks, TMan - and your syntax is just fine.
I'm still dusting, though only during my lunch break at work. I have dialup at home, and while the VM still works, the wait for a download is excruciating compared to broadband
To date I've examined 2718 real movies and have marked 18 of them for possible tracks. Of those, two have passed the team's first cut as WCO. A few of my others I think should be WCO as well, but the team hasn't gotten to them yet. The rest of them are probably terrestrial inclusions.
I haven't been the first one to click on anything yet, but I'll be happy to be one of the "agreements" on any real IS dust particles ![]()
The number of new S@H participants joining per day seems to be levelling off, with the total number hanging around 15,000. I'm staying at about the same level in the ranks for the 1/2 hour or so I do a day.
I wonder how many volunteers have stopped dusting?
O' Dave thanks for the nice comment.
I slowed down dramatically one week ago or so. I'm concerned about less news on the scanning process and the handling with the existing movies. If the actual process is that what we have http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=78, then we could have (long ago) a "coffee break" until new movies are coming in.
It shows a pool of circa 80'000 existing Real Movies. When I take my score of ~19'500 seen Real Movies and extrapolate it with all the other searchers, I guess we have seen already all these movies sufficiently - Even yourself got the same Real Movie several times (which could be likely in this system of one (movie) pool sadly).
As far I'm not in the know where we actually stand in the process and whether seen movies will taken out or not (and if so which quantity of them remain), I not really feel like doing further in the search. Therefore I will probably leave sooner or later the "illustrious" first hundred... I guess
Apropos first hundred, I'm struck there're some searchers who be thinking about to search in each movie of the finally ~700'000 several times...
My current statistic:
Calibration Movies Answered Correctly: 7440
Calibration Movies Answered Incorrectly: 9
Your Overall Score: 7431
Total Real Movies Viewed: 19463
Your Rank: 54 out of 15138
Specificity: 99.92%
Sensitivity: 99.84%
Marked 30 of them for possible tracks (none of them as the first one too). Following have got a comment so far:
Movie 7249257V1 / 167 47 Passed cut 1 IS candidate lower right
Movie 5714462V1 / 198 77 Not Extraterrestrial inclusions
Movie 433711V1 / 251 57 Passed cut 1 another IDP
Movie 7933874V1 / 221 8 Indeterminate (but well-known by the Team)
Movie 7567884V1 / 186 45 Passed cut 1 unknown, WCO
Movie 8130472V1 / 129 45 Passed cut 1 IDP?
The still not commented rest are probably mostly terrestrial inclusions too.
If you like to have a look at, then copy and paste the movie ID in that example http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/myevents_viewer.php?id=433711V1
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1186
But it wasn't the reason of lack of information - that is still misty to me.
Some clarifications though: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1134&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)