EVE Search - Tips for Project Discovery exoplanets?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Tips for Project Discovery exoplanets?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Naril Mikjail Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2017.07.11 15:05:26 - [1] - Quote Hi everyone! Has anyone some tricks and tips to locate the correct answer in Project Discovery? I really suck on it Thanks
Vanessa Celtis Vanessa Atalanta 21	Posted - 2017.07.11 15:15:31 - [2] - Quote Naril Mikjail wrote: Hi everyone! Has anyone some tricks and tips to locate the correct answer in Project Discovery? I really suck on it Thanks Same for me. The samples provided do not have enough granularity to find any patterns, un-playable. There should be a way to zoom-in but having more granularity so actually see any pattern.
Sp3ktr3 Unicorn Rampage 54	Posted - 2017.07.11 15:33:01 - [3] - Quote Vanessa Celtis wrote: Naril Mikjail wrote: Hi everyone! Has anyone some tricks and tips to locate the correct answer in Project Discovery? I really suck on it Thanks Same for me, sorry no tip, I tried for several hours and I found zero transition. The samples provided do not have enough granularity to find any transition, it's un-playable and the user-interface sucks. There should be a way to zoom-in but having more granularity so you can actually see any existing transition pattern. Fail fit! You can zoom in. Maybe you should do the tutorial again.
Naril Mikjail Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2017.07.11 15:34:40 - [4] - Quote All samples have too much noise and even zooming I can't see anything
Vanessa Celtis Vanessa Atalanta 21	Posted - 2017.07.11 15:42:47 - [5] - Quote Sp3ktr3 wrote: Vanessa Celtis wrote: Naril Mikjail wrote: Hi everyone! Has anyone some tricks and tips to locate the correct answer in Project Discovery? I really suck on it Thanks Same for me, sorry no tip, I tried for several hours and I found zero transition. The samples provided do not have enough granularity to find any transition, it's un-playable and the user-interface sucks. There should be a way to zoom-in but having more granularity so you can actually see any existing transition pattern. Fail fit! You can zoom in. Maybe you should do the tutorial again. You can zoom in yes but when you zoom-in, the displayed details you see do not provide enough granularity to actually "with a human eye" identify any planet transition. it's a loss of time to play this with the provided samples at this stage. The tutorial gives obvious samples, but once you start with the real data the samples provided are too noisy.
Marek Kanenald Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 25	Posted - 2017.07.11 16:16:04 - [6] - Quote The type of data analysis that this requires seems a lot more suitable for a computer algorithm than for a human.
Edik Edik The Scope Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2017.07.11 17:27:02 - [7] - Quote This is very hard, example of one of my analysis: http://imgur.com/a/iSZBJ Even after they gave me the result I still cannot get it
Vanessa Celtis Vanessa Atalanta 21	Posted - 2017.07.11 17:37:15 - [8] - Quote Edik Edik wrote: This is very hard, example of one of my analysis: http://imgur.com/a/iSZBJ Even after they gave me the result I still cannot get it I think CCP has reversed the hard mode with the easy mode by mistake; all of a sudden easier samples come in, I don't know what happend, but I suppose CCP is looking at the logs and tuning things in real-time on the servers and fixes initial issues.
Bones Prefect Wormholers in Highsec Wormholes United 0	Posted - 2017.07.11 17:51:50 - [9] - Quote https://imgur.com/a/uh4hP https://imgur.com/a/AZoR8 The images are the same correction viewed under folded and not folded to a failed attempt I made.... How are we supposed to pick out what appears to be completely random squiggles as a transit? So far nothing makes apparent sense in this system... Pick out the dips and it tells you that youre wrong, only to show you squiggles that dont even slightly resemble eachother or even resemble dips at all...
Mikstopher Nordic Hawks Phalanx Federation 0	Posted - 2017.07.11 18:19:37 - [10] - Quote The way this system is set up they make you feel all good about yourself with the tutorial and you are rocking out and getting them all right... And then you get to the actual part where you look at real data... And they make you feel like you were born yesterday... Get your confidence up and then smash you with data that looks completely unreadable. I have not gotten a single one right and less than 1 hour after I started the project discovery I am not even getting rewards anymore.

hipotecadoydesgraciado Heresy Incorporated 11	Posted - 2017.07.11 18:39:30 - [11] - Quote Its more easy use the KEPLER instead
Yarosara Ruil Haighare Pirates 1051	Posted - 2017.07.11 18:50:20 - [12] - Quote Citoplasm is the powerhouse of the exoplanet! Works every time for me.
M4cD0g GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1	Posted - 2017.07.11 20:07:00 - [13] - Quote Sp3ktr3 wrote: Vanessa Celtis wrote: Naril Mikjail wrote: Hi everyone! Has anyone some tricks and tips to locate the correct answer in Project Discovery? I really suck on it Thanks Same for me, sorry no tip, I tried for several hours and I found zero transition. The samples provided do not have enough granularity to find any transition, it's un-playable and the user-interface sucks. There should be a way to zoom-in but having more granularity so you can actually see any existing transition pattern. Fail fit! You can zoom in. Maybe you should do the tutorial again. You mean like this: Detrend 1h: https://imgur.com/gXoXz5P Detrend 10h: https://i.imgur.com/aVz5yJH.png No Detrend: https://i.imgur.com/bRjfydS.png The picture i linked is supposed to be a transition ZOOMED IN! Sure, buddy, zoom in works great! The system is complete bollocks. There is no pattern that we can see. Either they screwed up the data and solutions or they do not show the real data. It's broken.
Artenso Vestindal Evil Intention Synergy of Steel 15	Posted - 2017.07.11 20:24:15 - [14] - Quote I will just put theese examples here...
NanoSpirit Raiju 3	Posted - 2017.07.11 20:44:40 - [15] - Quote This mini-game is unfun, frustrating and you dont learn anything between different sample... so difficult to improve... WHen I look at the answer provided when you fail, and you zoom in, you are like.. wtf is that... - Unclear - Inconsistent between sample - UI and presentation make it worse... There is a limit between getting real life and video game gameplay.. I am not here to become a scientist
Galaxxis Unicorn Rampage 200	Posted - 2017.07.11 21:18:20 - [16] - Quote It seems like there are some false positives as well as completely missed transits in some of the evaluation samples. I have to wonder if they had grad students working on these, and how drunk they were at the time.
Baboo Yagu 29	Posted - 2017.07.11 21:27:57 - [17] - Quote This Project Discovery has to be a joke. CCP are trolling us. How the hell do the expect somebody to notice this, apparently the correct selections was just random selections that don't stand out from the background in any shape or form. https://i.imgur.com/iwgkyCF.png If it was the odd one I'd understand, but it seems to be 99% of samples that do this. No matter how you analyse any obvious blips in signal it always fails you and shows you something that nobody would ever notice. I've had more luck just hitting the 'No Transition' button on every sample.
DrysonBennington Eagle's Talon's 330	Posted - 2017.07.11 21:54:35 - [18] - Quote Project Tutorial The reason why the Project is difficult is because there was a mix up in the plates that you were given. They put the harder plates at the beginning. I was at about 4% accuracy when I started getting easier plates to study. So keep at it, it does get easier. Here are a few screenshots of successful transit discoveries, Consensus Plates and Missed Transits. In the first image you will see the typical "noise" of the surface of the sun that is detected by the space telescopes. On the left and right are the transits of a planetary body that look like fangs or ice sickles. When you zoom in you can see the depth of the transit, or how much light is being blocked by the object, which in this the object is blocking 2.599 % of the suns light. You subtract the amount of the dip from 100 where 100 is the surface of the sun. 100 is the output of light from the sun would be normal. Normal means nothing blocking the light from the sun or solar flares causing an increase in the light curve of the sun. Think of it this way. You have $100 and you add $5 now you have $105 or 105% the normal light curve of the sun. Once again you have $100 and purchase a Beefy Big Boy from the lunch room fun machine that costs $2.59....Hey come here a little closer, just to let you know I like to out my Beefy Big Boy in between the sandwich buns and then...Beep...Beep....Anuirison!..Sorry Bryson just showing them the Fun Machine, I mean vending machin...Back to the tutorial. Now you have $97.41 left which equals 97.41% of the sun light that is showing. For those more in tune with planet hunting the readout would be .0259/.9741. Click in the center of either transit and colored line will appear. Because there is only one transit on this plate simply drag your line to the second transit and then click Fold. You will be able to tell that your transits match up as the further you drag your transit line to the second transit the other transit markers disappear. So you probably guessed it by now that the more lines on your screen means that all of the lines have to match up with an ice sickle or fang in order to be considered a transit. Along the bottom is your transit length and total transit time. In this case the transit on the left starts out at Epoch 4.235(day of the week when transit started) and takes 17.049 days to complete its orbit at Epoch 21.25. An orbital period is the amount of time it takes an object to orbit another object. In this case the orbital period for Earth would be ~365 days. Intro 1 https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/c121/acznjbcs73lj63d6g.jpg Intro 2 https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/711e/89c1ps64zub6zgm6g.jpg I will do more of the tutorial tomorrow.
Valera Schwert Das zweite Konglomerat Circle-Of-Two 0	Posted - 2017.07.11 21:57:22 - [19] - Quote I have no idea why this failed ... https://imgur.com/gallery/DPaOb
Vanessa Celtis Vanessa Atalanta 21	Posted - 2017.07.11 22:05:37 - [20] - Quote Valera Schwert wrote: I have no idea why this failed ... https://imgur.com/gallery/DPaOb Because the red was a SECOND pattern; you need to double click when validating to have in this case two patterns selected and then only submit.

DrysonBennington Eagle's Talon's 330	Posted - 2017.07.11 22:15:28 - [21] - Quote Valera Schwert wrote: I have no idea why this failed ... https://imgur.com/gallery/DPaOb Because there are two different transits present. The one that is marked in green that was correct is one and the one marked in read is another one. When you have plates like this with more than one transit that lines along the same line the other transit will be a second second transit. The wavy suns like the one in your image are sometimes hard to mark. Just mark all the lower transits with one marker and the higher transits with another marker. Want me to get ya a Beefy Big Boy from the Fun Machine....Beep...Beep....ANUIRISUN!
zoltan Ishikela Fe Solari 0	Posted - 2017.07.11 22:25:20 - [22] - Quote http://imgur.com/RLoKtKb missed 1 marker, FAILED
Zeewolf 46137 Saor Alba 22	Posted - 2017.07.11 22:29:50 - [23] - Quote If they are able to show us the answer once submitted, then surely they dont need us as they already know. This all seems highly pointless, cant see the 'fun' lasting long.
zoltan Ishikela Fe Solari 0	Posted - 2017.07.11 22:41:39 - [24] - Quote Zeewolf 46137 wrote: If they are able to show us the answer once submitted, then surely they dont need us as they already know. This all seems highly pointless, cant see the 'fun' lasting long. i think the ones that are already have the answer are ones that have been analyzed already and are still put in to see if we can see anything different, just my though tho
Shalua Rui Rui Freelance Mining 30547	Posted - 2017.07.11 22:52:30 - [25] - Quote zoltan Ishikela wrote: Zeewolf 46137 wrote: If they are able to show us the answer once submitted, then surely they dont need us as they already know. This all seems highly pointless, cant see the 'fun' lasting long. i think the ones that are already have the answer are ones that have been analyzed already and are still put in to see if we can see anything different, just my though tho Pretty much... that's how test groups work. We aren't actually analyzing those readings - would be shoddy science if we did. We are just there to "proof read", so to speak. Anyways, I just don't see it... down to 1% and stopping now. "ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
zoltan Ishikela Fe Solari 0	Posted - 2017.07.11 23:03:02 - [26] - Quote i want the ship so ima keep grinding, and some how maintaining 50% acc, but i have been getting mixed between ones that have been done by just us, first time ones, and the occasional already checked one
Vanessa Celtis Vanessa Atalanta 22	Posted - 2017.07.11 23:05:11 - [27] - Quote Shalua Rui wrote: zoltan Ishikela wrote: Zeewolf 46137 wrote: If they are able to show us the answer once submitted, then surely they dont need us as they already know. This all seems highly pointless, cant see the 'fun' lasting long. i think the ones that are already have the answer are ones that have been analyzed already and are still put in to see if we can see anything different, just my though tho Pretty much... that's how test groups work. We aren't actually analyzing those readings - would be shoddy science if we did. We are just there to "proof read", so to speak. Anyways, I just don't see it... down to 1% and stopping now. Was the same for me. Down to 1%, then I insisted (I really did insist), all of a sudden easy samples came up like in the tutorial, so I am now at 93% (getting 2M a tick) and close to grabbing the Pacifier BP. So my take on this, don't care for your mouse and click the hell out of it !
Blade Darth Room for Improvement Limited Expectations 270	Posted - 2017.07.11 23:59:36 - [28] - Quote Play with the "flattening" option and it's range. Zoom in on some parts Even if there is no obvious transits, try to fold it in places that look somewhat interesting. Look for overlapping repeating patterns while scrolling. Good way to deal with pulsating or binary stars too, fold the waveform and see what stands out. Speaking of harder planets, they messed up and included advanced examples in begginer set. Omen Navy Issue Tutorial
Matthias Ancaladron Wrath of Angels Solitaire. 403	Posted - 2017.07.12 00:12:47 - [29] - Quote The game is currently broken and full of incorrectly labeled slides. Theyre resetting everyone's accuracy tomorrow because of how broken it currently is. It's just picking random increments and labeling them as transits when many of the pictures have no transits present. If you correctly answer no transits you get it wrong because the slides are all wrong and the only way to get it right is to randomly select and pray to God you picked the right random intervals.
Matthias Ancaladron Wrath of Angels Solitaire. 403	Posted - 2017.07.12 00:13:42 - [30] - Quote Blade Darth wrote: Play with the "flattening" option and it's range. Zoom in on some parts Even if there is no obvious transits, try to fold it in places that look somewhat interesting. Look for overlapping repeating patterns while scrolling. Good way to deal with pulsating or binary stars too, fold the waveform and see what stands out. Speaking of harder planets, they messed up and included advanced examples in begginer set. It's not even the hard ones. Theyre just all wrong.

Blade Darth Room for Improvement Limited Expectations 270	Posted - 2017.07.12 00:41:35 - [31] - Quote Not all. 10% is messed up. Omen Navy Issue Tutorial
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 3278	Posted - 2017.07.12 01:06:05 - [32] - Quote Matthias Ancaladron wrote: The game is currently broken and full of incorrectly labeled slides. Theyre resetting everyone's accuracy tomorrow because of how broken it currently is. It's just picking random increments and labeling them as transits when many of the pictures have no transits present. If you correctly answer no transits you get it wrong because the slides are all wrong and the only way to get it right is to randomly select and pray to God you picked the right random intervals. Oh, good. I thought I was just ******* terrible at this. :D Well, I may be yet, we'll see. Even had a few in which there was likely no transit, but I marked one because it seemed like the system decided they ALL had transits and spent no shortage of time trying to post-mortem why it said my marked transit was wrong when it was utterly indistinguishable from what it labelled a transit. "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Galaxxis Unicorn Rampage 200	Posted - 2017.07.12 01:36:14 - [33] - Quote Valera Schwert wrote: I have no idea why this failed ... https://imgur.com/gallery/DPaOb Most likely marked as two separate transiting planets in a 2:1 mean-motion resonance due to the different transit depths. To make this particular pattern they would have to be transiting at the same time, which is a little odd but not impossible.
Tavin Aikisen Phoenix Naval Operations Phoenix Naval Systems 448	Posted - 2017.07.12 02:41:33 - [34] - Quote Tutorial tells me to click on spikes. I click on spike and submit. Apparently it was smaller spikes inbetween the bigger spikes on a flat line that are the "spikes".... Seriously this is the most incoherent game mechanic I've ever known in recent times... I'll just spam "no transit" until I hit rank 250 or quit... "Remember this. Trust your eyes, you will kill each other. Trust your veins, you can all go home." -Cold Wind
Vanessa Celtis Vanessa Atalanta 23	Posted - 2017.07.12 02:44:27 - [35] - Quote Tavin Aikisen wrote: Tutorial tells me to click on spikes. I click on spike and submit. Apparently it was smaller spikes inbetween the bigger spikes on a flat line that are the "spikes".... Seriously this is the most incoherent game mechanic I've ever known in recent times... I'll just spam "no transit" until I hit rank 250 or quit... Bump!
Shallanna Yassavi Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 560	Posted - 2017.07.12 03:39:32 - [36] - Quote Vanessa Celtis wrote: Valera Schwert wrote: I have no idea why this failed ... https://imgur.com/gallery/DPaOb Because the red was a SECOND pattern / planet; you need to double click when validating to have in this case two patterns selected and then only submit. It looks like the same pattern to me. The planet looks like it crossed the star twice as often as she thought it did. A signature :o
Sarrian Calda Perkone Caldari State 15	Posted - 2017.07.12 04:40:01 - [37] - Quote Matthias Ancaladron wrote: The game is currently broken and full of incorrectly labeled slides. Theyre resetting everyone's accuracy tomorrow because of how broken it currently is. It's just picking random increments and labeling them as transits when many of the pictures have no transits present. If you correctly answer no transits you get it wrong because the slides are all wrong and the only way to get it right is to randomly select and pray to God you picked the right random intervals. May I know where you got this info about the broken state of the game and that they are resetting it from? And, I have my share of problem with identifying the transits too. http://imgur.com/a/TkSkp
Spc One The Chodak Void Alliance 325	Posted - 2017.07.12 10:21:52 - [38] - Quote I have no idea what i am doing, even in tutorial i fail all the time.
Cara LeCroix Bouncing Between Comets 2	Posted - 2017.07.12 11:26:44 - [39] - Quote It's not that hard I like the game fwiw, some of the slides are hard, but most of them are really easy.
Kumwamato Perkone Caldari State 0	Posted - 2017.07.12 11:35:07 - [40] - Quote it's quite easy http://imgur.com/a/bT72C

zitellona No Risk No ISK 2	Posted - 2017.07.12 12:10:29 - [41] - Quote How can the system know when someone has done a correct analysis? What the hell are we doing here?
Valera Schwert Das zweite Konglomerat Circle-Of-Two 1	Posted - 2017.07.12 12:11:54 - [42] - Quote DrysonBennington wrote: Valera Schwert wrote: I have no idea why this failed ... https://imgur.com/gallery/DPaOb Because there are two different transits present. The one that is marked in green that was correct is one and the one marked in read is another one. When you have plates like this with more than one transit that lines along the same line the other transit will be a second second transit. The wavy suns like the one in your image are sometimes hard to mark. Just mark all the lower transits with one marker and the higher transits with another marker. Want me to get ya a Beefy Big Boy from the Fun Machine....Beep...Beep....ANUIRISUN! I understand the idea of a second planet (second pattern). However, this assumed second pattern has the exact same interval as the first pattern but is shifted by 1/2. That would mean that the second planet is exactly opposite to the first. How high is the chance for that? :)
Valera Schwert Das zweite Konglomerat Circle-Of-Two 1	Posted - 2017.07.12 12:16:04 - [43] - Quote zoltan Ishikela wrote: http://imgur.com/RLoKtKb missed 1 marker, FAILED I had the exact same reason of failure. It even looks like the same data XD
Valera Schwert Das zweite Konglomerat Circle-Of-Two 1	Posted - 2017.07.12 12:18:21 - [44] - Quote Galaxxis wrote: Valera Schwert wrote: I have no idea why this failed ... https://imgur.com/gallery/DPaOb Most likely marked as two separate transiting planets in a 2:1 mean-motion resonance due to the different transit depths. To make this particular pattern they would have to be transiting at the same time, which is a little odd but not impossible. Actually I'm looking at this again, and I'm bothered by the fact that the transits are not only apparently overlapped, but also the exact same width. That shouldn't happen with two different orbits; the outer orbit should have a longer transit duration. And no, co-orbital planets aren't really a thing. I'm not convinced that their analysis of this light curve is correct. Oh hi! Thanks for that awesome answers. That pretty much matched my thoughts, thanks a lot! :)
Virginia Flake The Scope Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2017.07.12 12:20:20 - [45] - Quote It is very simple, really. You should see distinct "V" dip or a series of dips. You mark them and proceed. When you don't see "V" deep, you click "No transit". That's it. Don't try to find some tricky system in the noise. It's not there. As I understnad it - it's a game of statistics, so our answers are superimposed. When game has little statistics sometimes you'll get a failure, because - it seems - system can't compare your answer to some data. But as you progress - it becomes much more predictable. If you don't see distinct narrow V, if you don't see obvious pattern, then click "no transit". I mostly get "No transit" plates. I've went to 0,4% accurancy, now I'm back to 65%, got 9 discovery skins. Best,
Shalua Rui Rui Freelance Mining 30550	Posted - 2017.07.12 12:32:08 - [46] - Quote Huh... suddenly, after failing 1000 times, the easy stuff showed up. Up to 60% accuracy now. "ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Vanessa Celtis Vanessa Atalanta 25	Posted - 2017.07.12 12:53:40 - [47] - Quote Shalua Rui wrote: Huh... suddenly, after failing 1000 times, the easy stuff showed up. Up to 60% accuracy now. That is CCP, manipulating things around behind the scene especially the ratios easy vs. hard samples !
Shalua Rui Rui Freelance Mining 30550	Posted - 2017.07.12 13:12:43 - [48] - Quote Vanessa Celtis wrote: Shalua Rui wrote: Huh... suddenly, after failing 1000 times, the easy stuff showed up. Up to 60% accuracy now. That is CCP, manipulating things around behind the scene especially the ratios easy vs. hard samples ! Cheeky. "ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Pan Pan Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2017.07.12 13:16:53 - [49] - Quote Best thing I have discovered... While zoomed in to a width of about 3 days, click on a suspected transit, then move the slider in the window below to look for another. When you see one hover your mouse over it to bring up the orbital period ticks. If you see one you like, click it, and keep panning. Don't be too quick to go into folded mode. It's time consuming and resets the whole interface when you exit.
I 4M L3Gl0N EVE University Ivy League 0	Posted - 2017.07.12 15:01:47 - [50] - Quote This is worse than there being no point to this - it is not only discouraging me to play the mini-game it is discouraging me to play EVE at all if this is how they plan to treat players. This is not hard - it is impossible. There is no discernable pattern between the supposed correct transits and the noise around it. Usually the "correct transits" look less like transits than the noise around them. And the dips in luminosity of these supposed transits are near or less than the average dips. The largest 20% of the dips in luminosity aren't even considered transits. Pure stupidity - on either CCP's part or I guess mine for even bothering. Did anyone at CCP not involved in its creation even try it to test the user experience?

Edik Edik The Scope Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2017.07.12 15:17:54 - [51] - Quote https://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/eve-online-news/exoplanet-research-with-project-discovery-join-the-developer-live-stream-on-july-12-at-17-30-utc/
M4cD0g GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1	Posted - 2017.07.12 21:32:32 - [52] - Quote Edik Edik wrote: https://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/eve-online-news/exoplanet-research-with-project-discovery-join-the-developer-live-stream-on-july-12-at-17-30-utc/ Spectacular FAIL of the developer of this at one of the bullshit samples. Can't get better than that! Take a hint CCP. If even your main developer that has worked on this for months can't solve this don't expect us to. Remove the frustrating random garbage samples. https://i.imgur.com/BdDpVLs.jpg Hilarious!
Shalua Rui Rui Freelance Mining 30556	Posted - 2017.07.12 21:38:23 - [53] - Quote M4cD0g wrote: Edik Edik wrote: https://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/eve-online-news/exoplanet-research-with-project-discovery-join-the-developer-live-stream-on-july-12-at-17-30-utc/ Spectacular FAIL of the developer of this at one of the bullshit samples. Can't get better than that! Take a hint CCP. If even your main developer that has worked on this for months can't solve this don't expect us to. Remove the frustrating random garbage samples. https://i.imgur.com/BdDpVLs.jpg Hilarious! It's quite a hit and miss affair... I was going great for some time now, then suddenly back to one unreadable sample after the other and *swoosh" down by 20% accuracy. "ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Anton Sosnicev Y.G.G.D.R.A.S.I.L. Out of Sight. 0	Posted - 2017.07.13 00:33:28 - [54] - Quote http://i.imgur.com/SnE5Gjc.png What is this? Almost 4 day nothing?
Sephiroth Clone VII Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance 168	Posted - 2017.07.13 01:50:45 - [55] - Quote Here is a good hint, the zoom tool is used by clicking on the left side of the lower bar and draging left. With that it could be made more obvious to see where it is like a button or a slider.
Sephiroth CloneIIV Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance 168	Posted - 2017.07.13 01:50:45 - [56] - Quote Here is a good hint, the zoom tool is used by clicking on the left side of the lower bar and draging left. With that it could be made more obvious to see where it is like a button or a slider.
Soulstinger The Crimson Raiders 0	Posted - 2017.07.13 10:49:55 - [57] - Quote The implementation and explanation of this game asset is infuriating. Not enough is explained about how the interface works, how to learn from your mistakes - which all too often are completely indiscernible from background noise- or how to refine your selection using the time dilation. What results mean you had too tight an orbit described, or what your results indicated that was false. Or, and this is one of my biggest complaints, is when you have one obvious transit dip by itself, no other indicators...and the system says you were incorrect marking the one transit as the source you missed. - WE CANNOT SELECT A SINGLE TRANSIT AND POST IT- There is no way to succeed on a slide with only one transit! if you mark it as empty, you are shown the single transit as your mistake, If you mark the single transit and some other random squiggle, you are shown your random squiggle as your mistake! Overall this system feels like it was intended for people with a much higher threshold of knowledge about the subject matter, and the interface feels like it is missing a step, some sort of pre- selection fold mechanic that allows us to further filter out background noise.
Shalua Rui Rui Freelance Mining 30568	Posted - 2017.07.13 10:54:52 - [58] - Quote You can mark a single transit by double klicking. "ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 372	Posted - 2017.07.13 12:52:36 - [59] - Quote Maybe someone doesn't want to be discovered. ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Vanessa Celtis Vanessa Atalanta 27	Posted - 2017.07.13 17:58:14 - [60] - Quote CCP, please do us a favor: http://i.imgur.com/RYVGnT5.jpg

Sarmoung Diaconescu Military Wormholers 0	Posted - 2017.07.13 18:48:50 - [61] - Quote How was that even possible...!? http://imgur.com/a/nkWqM
Photrius Pyrelius University of Caille Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2017.07.14 00:36:54 - [62] - Quote Vanessa Celtis wrote: Naril Mikjail wrote: Hi everyone! Has anyone some tricks and tips to locate the correct answer in Project Discovery? I really suck on it Thanks Same for me, sorry no tip, I tried for several hours and I found zero transition. The samples provided do not have enough granularity to find any transition, it's un-playable and the user-interface sucks. There should be a way to zoom-in but having more granularity so you can actually see any existing transition pattern. Fail fit! The lack of granularity is due to the telescope taking its measurements only so many times per day (seems to be around 150 times per day [estimate, not counting all those little dots]). Also due to the inconsistency in the light measurement due to God-knows what dust and space stuff (not to mention other photons) transiting the star in the light years between the telescope and the star. I'm also getting very frustrated with this. I don't even care so much about the rewards, I mostly want to give them good data, and I can't do that if I can't learn how to give good data. =-( It would be nice if I could use the folding tool after I fail a slide. EDIT: Yeah, I just cannot get the hang of this. I fail the known tests and I go back and loot at them and the transits I'm supposed highlight have upward spikes in them. That's the opposite of what's supposed to happen. Maybe I'll try again in a few months, let them iron out whatever problems are plaguing it. Or maybe I'm just not meant to be an exoplanet hunter. =(
Ghazbaran Porterhausen Industries Demonic Wheat Pineapple 9	Posted - 2017.07.14 15:42:21 - [63] - Quote How? http://imgur.com/a/Ssezo
Phoenix Paaltamo Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 0	Posted - 2017.07.14 18:42:42 - [64] - Quote What the!? http://imgur.com/5BtZxpD
Kevin Forrest Yumping Amok Dot Dot Dot 0	Posted - 2017.07.15 07:59:57 - [65] - Quote This is becoming more frustrating by the day. I cant get my accuracy above 70% most of the time because of stupid ones that seem to insist theres a pattern when even after zooming in and having a closer look, i still cant see one. The fact that this seems to work of a consensus means that if 100 people are wrong and 50 people are right, then the right answer becomes the wrong one, its ridiculous. Someone must have told the devs that 2 wrongs make a right somewhere down the line. I've had ones where a singular line goes up meaning an abundance of light apparently being the right answer, but to me, that means a possible solar flare and its obviously not what im looking for. Please correct me if im wrong but aren't we supposed to be doing the opposite? looking for shades of lines pointing down that stand out that could indicate a possible planet? I believe that now the majority of people have had a few days to get to grips with this game, it needs to have another wipe. If only to correct the ones that have been done badly by people who are learning how to play the game, or set up some sort of ranking system where you only get the choice from a select amount of data between each 10 levels or so, so anyone who's grinding this out for the rewards or simply enjoys doing it, can use data that hasnt been touched by people who only played for a few hours and didnt have a clue what they were actually looking for
DrysonBennington Eagle's Talon's 330	Posted - 2017.07.16 11:16:09 - [66] - Quote zoltan Ishikela wrote: http://imgur.com/RLoKtKb missed 1 marker, FAILED Nah, that was a Successful Analysis.
DrysonBennington Eagle's Talon's 330	Posted - 2017.07.16 11:33:01 - [67] - Quote Ghazbaran wrote: How? http://imgur.com/a/Ssezo Sometimes you will also find what are called False Positives that look like dips but are not.
Gulnack Corrupted Cluster ODA 0	Posted - 2017.07.16 16:05:23 - [68] - Quote Two things... First, I found a lot of people on here to be correct when they said it gets easier. Anytime I dip down to around 45% I get a few easy examples to push me back over 50% before getting some garbage again. A lot of times I can detect a faint pattern. I know something is there, but despite that knowledge I cannot pull out the answer they are looking for. Second, the analysis UI/Tool is pretty but not practical. I can't exactly put my finger on what's needed but feel that the detrend option needs additional tuning parameters to allow us to better confirm/reject 'ghost' patterns. Don't disable folding after the answer has been revealed (let us explore and learn from errors)... Finally, I HIGHLY suspect that the data integrity of the training set may be flawed.... Maybe not, maybe we just need better tools, but I really do think some of the "answers" are indicating false positives. Once again, enable folding for exploration after the answer has been revealed. Third, this is maybe the most frustrating, I'm pretty sure that a significant number of Eve players could do a better job if they were just given the raw data in a csv. Seriously, a moving average, some regression analysis, outlier detection and a simple check for autocorrelation could be done more effectively in Excel than through this UI... It's more frustrating than fun and doesn't advance the science. I'd be willing to bet that at least a few players more ambitious and enterprising than myself are already pumping the CREST data through R. Seriously, what are we doing here?
Larry Fat Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2017.07.16 23:39:19 - [69] - Quote The UI .. sigh.. some full screen option would be good. Also why would you change the y-axis on me while i'm moving the zoom area to look for a matching pattern?! What do you think of this beauty kek sweet 16 day orbital period that doesn't fit the screen..
Photrius Pyrelius University of Caille Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2017.07.17 02:32:59 - [70] - Quote Larry Fat wrote: The UI .. sigh.. some full screen option would be good. Also why would you change the y-axis on me while i'm moving the zoom area to look for a matching pattern?! What do you think of this beauty kek sweet 16 day orbital period that doesn't fit the screen.. All you can say on the orbital period is that it is at least fourteen and a half days. Also, just how. How?! How is someone supposed to tell there's a transit there? The yellow points look no different than the surrounding data points.

Larry Fat Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2017.07.17 13:34:19 - [71] - Quote I'm stuck at around 70% because .. coming at this from a game angle.. it'd be super helpful to know _why_ i failed so I could improve. The cell thing was better because being a visual person i sucked at first but then improved quickly because it was easier to learn from my mistakes. How about a brief explanation "what to look for" or an answer key of sorts at the predetermined slides.
Phil Stargazer TimeZone Warriors Rate My Ticks 0	Posted - 2017.07.17 13:56:54 - [72] - Quote Larry Fat wrote: I'm stuck at around 70% because .. coming at this from a game angle.. it'd be super helpful to know _why_ i failed so I could improve. The cell thing was better because being a visual person i sucked at first but then improved quickly because it was easier to learn from my mistakes. How about a brief explanation "what to look for" or an answer key of sorts at the predetermined slides. Agree. When I get a "failed analysis" I'd like to learn why. For this to get successful, the reference sheets with known results should be extended with detailed data WHY the known result IS the known result. So we can learn. Also, being able to fold/zoom after a failed analysis would be SUPER helpful. I miss zooming on folds anyways.
Deck Cadelanne CAStabouts 393	Posted - 2017.07.17 14:58:54 - [73] - Quote Have played with this for a few hours now. Have to say, whether it is the interface, the granularity of the data or whatever - seems like bullshit to me. Expecting the human eye to infer patterns in what is essentially random static. "This random cluster is a transit, even though it had no features in common with the other random clusters that are allegedly the same object's transits" Yeah, right. *"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."* - Hunter S. Thompson
Amy G Dalin Dream of Kings and Sisters 0	Posted - 2017.07.17 23:54:37 - [74] - Quote Planets are Magick I thought the game was trying to trick me, because the star is consistently getting brighter before and after the planet passes in front of it, and planets don't make stars brighter, short of falling into them. So, if this really is a planet, how is the star getting brighter? The only thing I can imagine is gravitational lensing, and I'm not at all convinced that's a viable explanation. Edit: I decided to do the tutorial again, and it seems there really is a brightness increase. The things I don't pay attention to.
Matthias Ancaladron Wrath of Angels Solitaire. 429	Posted - 2017.07.18 11:04:04 - [75] - Quote Amy G Dalin wrote: Planets are Magick I thought the game was trying to trick me, because the star is consistently getting brighter before and after the planet passes in front of it, and planets don't make stars brighter, short of falling into them. So, if this really is a planet, how is the star getting brighter? The only thing I can imagine is gravitational lensing, and I'm not at all convinced that's a viable explanation. Edit: I decided to do the tutorial again, and it seems there really is a brightness increase. The things I don't pay attention to. that has nothing to do with the planet, its normal cycle is going up and down.
Nuefrau Simalia EVE University Ivy League 0	Posted - 2017.07.18 12:32:10 - [76] - Quote I have been grinding away at this for a few days now and seem to be doing OK. My accuracy is hovering around 70% and I have the hang of the tools available. What confuses me are the results I get after I submit my findings. Analysis succeeded/failed seems to mean that I did or did not match a professionally analyzed result. The impact is a bump or drop in my accuracy rating. This kind of makes sense but most/all of my "fails" are plates that I still can't see a pattern in and that is frustrating. There are also plates where I find some but not all or too many planets and that is counted as a fail instead of partial credit. The consensus ones really make me wonder what we are doing. They don't hurt my accuracy score, but my results and what other people are reporting are very often wildly different. I tend to only mark what I consider an obvious single drop in brightness or in folded trends, but it appears to me that some folks are marking any dip below average which would create a bunch of false positives for the real researches to spend time reviewing. Or maybe they are right and I just can't see the patterns they found. Anyway, I agree there is room for improvement, but I am going to keep doing it until I get really bored or burned out.
Nankeen Heron Jim's Mowing 26	Posted - 2017.07.23 01:58:46 - [77] - Quote Like others, I'm getting frustrated with exoplanets. I managed to get up above 70% and thought I had finally figured it out - then crashed below 60% after a series of training sets with "invisible" transits. Zooming in and using the various detrend Another had an obvious series of dips that folded perfectly - yet every other dip was marked as a false positive. I revisited the tutorial and did better than the first time, but it simply doesn't equip you with the necessary techniques to deal with anything other than the obvious training sets. It feels like trying to do brain surgery, when the only tool you are given is a hammer. Would a fully adjustable detrend tool help? I would like to see a video of an exoplanet expert demonstrating how to find the "invisible" transits using the same tools we are given - I am not convinced that it is possible.
Raynault Aymar TerminalDogma 1	Posted - 2017.07.23 20:35:18 - [78] - Quote This is a joke, right? https://imgur.com/a/fWgnT
Sister Virgin Hydromagnetic Physics and Engineering Safety Panel 8	Posted - 2017.07.25 08:48:44 - [79] - Quote If Project Discovery knows all the answers already, why is it asking us?
Neuntausend Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 1766	Posted - 2017.07.25 10:28:51 - [80] - Quote Sister Virgin wrote: If Project Discovery knows all the answers already, why is it asking us? It doesn't. They put in some supposedly known ones to check if we are actually doing what we are supposed to be doing, and not just clicking around randomly. With the cells this worked for the most part, but with the exoplanets I have the feeling they have either not checked these test samples themselves, and let an algorithm do it that isn't very accurate, or we are getting the wrong samples for some reason.

Daemin Raphael Red Diamond Industrial Association 0	Posted - 2017.07.25 15:03:17 - [81] - Quote Sister Virgin wrote: If Project Discovery knows all the answers already, why is it asking us? it doesnt. I believe some of them are resolved as a benchmark though. At around 65% or 70% you start getting ones that aren't solved, just a census result. Which is good and bad, means you can't be wrong, but also you can't be right. Above 80% I started getting some that aren't solved, and no one has solved them yet lol. So anything I put is whatever.
Fish Hunter Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation 48	Posted - 2017.08.01 22:40:03 - [82] - Quote Photrius Pyrelius wrote: Larry Fat wrote: The UI .. sigh.. some full screen option would be good. Also why would you change the y-axis on me while i'm moving the zoom area to look for a matching pattern?! What do you think of this beauty kek sweet 16 day orbital period that doesn't fit the screen.. All you can say on the orbital period is that it is at least fourteen and a half days. Also, just how. How?! How is someone supposed to tell there's a transit there? The yellow points look no different than the surrounding data points. I started trying to analyze a few and i get these ocassionally and i don't think its possible that we can pick these out of the mix with the tool we're given.
Tavin Aikisen Phoenix Naval Operations Phoenix Naval Systems 455	Posted - 2017.08.02 02:53:05 - [83] - Quote Aaaaand I'm done with this feature... "Remember this. Trust your eyes, you will kill each other. Trust your veins, you can all go home." -Cold Wind


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.