Add observation - Automatically tagged my observations with incorrect names based on photo filenames

Perhaps we need a personal setting - to choose whether or not we want to use this. Depending on how we name our photo files.

8 Likes

I would definitely like that.

2 Likes

Thank you for all the responses. My issue is fixed so far, though i agree with Diana’s suggestions; i don’t rename my photo files and i preferably don’t want this problem again in the future

2 Likes

Still happening to me on December 1. I wanted to load 18 pictures, but 8 were automatically called “Striped Bass.” None were of fish. They were birds and plants. And when I review suggestions for a single picture, all the suggestions were of fish species. I exited the page.

2 Likes

It’s not clear which if any of the suggestions (ignore 3 letter strings or shorter, only use the language the user is running in, other, none) were implemented, but I’m gonna guess your photos had ‘rock’ in the name, and that is entered as an English language name for Striped Bass. If so, that will have triggered it as it would not have been caught by any of the above.

Folks, I want to help, but I can’t unless you tell me what files names are resulting in what taxa. You can also tell me observation or photo URLs and I can look up the file names from that. “Everything is a striped bass” is not feedback I use to fix anything.

5 Likes

I don’t know for sure what you are asking, but I’m not very computer oriented. I loaded two pictures that were automatically identified as “striped bass.” Here is the URL for one of them:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/36335299
And yes, it was taken at White Rock Lake, which is in my file name.
Susan

3 Likes

my file names never have taxon info but often have location info. Can we not have a code string to use to tell iNat what the name indicates?. for example ‘LOC’ followed by word(s) will indication location description , ‘TAXA’ followed by a word(s) will give taxon info and everything else is ignored. one could even have compound names such as LOC+words+TAXA+words which would populate location description and species name.

2 Likes

This would not help me, as having automatic population of the Species field by any means is a problem. I have uploaded several obs with faulty IDs since this change was made, even being alert to the issue and checking the entered ID with more care than usual. The problem is that since I nearly always enter the ID manually, once that field is filled out I disregard it as i move onto Fields, Tags, Description etc. Its hard enough getting those entered accurately when looking at 20-30 obs inthe uploader, so I would really appreciate regaining control over this aspect of iNat.

5 Likes

Yep. I’m uploading images right now with the file name Lion Rock, or Lone Kauri Road, (these are the location names where the observations were made), and as the image metadata loads, iNat automatically defaults the species ID to the big cat ‘Lion’ (even though these are rock pool obs), or the tree ‘Kauri’, (bird obs). Seems to be choosing the ID from the photo file name rather than the image.

2 Likes

https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/51392-Morone-saxatilis had a common name of “rock” in English which was the source of those misidentifications. That name seems absurd so I deleted it (having grown up in an anglophonic Atlantic place and now living in an anglophonic Pacific place, I have never heard anyone refer to this species as a “rock”). Issues like “Lion” and “Kauri” are harder to resolve since they are way more legit common names. FWIW, a cursory glance at the file names associated with iNat photos suggests:

  1. Most people do not rename their photo files
  2. Among people who do, using species names is WAY more common than place names
  3. There are, of course, some delightful people who do both

So I’m inclined to believe the current treatment of helping the species-namers while mildly inconveniencing the place-namers is doing more good than harm. Personally, I think you’re all crazy. Doesn’t it take enough time out of the day just to add these things as keywords?!

3 Likes

Takes no time at all: My phone’s camera has an option to add location name to the file name when taking a photo. the names are woefully bad, so I turned the feautre off. It can also add weather conditions to the file name, imagine that! Maybe it will be useful one day if iNat adds meterological observations.

3 Likes

My images are used for other reasons, not just iNaturalist, and it’s helpful to the receivers of any images I send, to see location information in the file name, particularly when I send a variety. Also with my filing system, which is by species name, it helps to quickly alpha search by location (from the file name in that species folder), if I need to send an image of a species from a particular location.

I’m not bothered by the random auto IDs, more amused than anything when iNat suggest Lion for a sea anemone. At least now I know why it’s happening, mystery solved. BTW, some would say I’m wacky, but maybe not crazy ;-)

7 Likes

Maybe it should only auto-detect it if a) it detects it all the way down to species or b) the user has opted-in somehow?

4 Likes

@danaleeling, for a person to label their photo with the correct species name, the person has to know what they’re looking at. Many of us do not know the genus or even family, etc. of the organisms we are documenting.

4 Likes

I keep having problems with the automatic labelling of species with words pulled from the names of photo files as well, mostly when I label something as “orange bug” or “orange mushroom,” in which case it gets labelled as Citrus x aurantium (=orange, the fruit). But the oddest one I’ve seen so far was this:

Somehow there’s a hash table that defines “skunk” not as Mephitis mephitis or its relatives but as a synonym for cannabis. (Does “weed” in file names also yield species labelled as Cannabis sativa?) Anyway, if the AI drew from both the name of the file and the content of the image, this problem would probably not exist – at least not in the same way.

12 Likes

That’s really funny!

1 Like

From: https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/75997-Cannabis-sativa


“skunk” is a listed common name.

There are a number threads on this topic of common names including:
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/reliable-sources-for-common-names-on-inaturalist/5579
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/erroneous-and-uncommon-common-names-as-the-default/7151
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/which-common-name-to-use-the-most-common-or-taxonomically-accurate/5952
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/fixing-incorrect-uncommon-common-names/5739
and many more. My first reaction would be that a slang term such as “skunk” which denotes another species should not be listed as a common name. The common name really should be, for a plant, a botanically used common name, I would have a hard time believing that skunk would be considered a botanically appropriate common name.

4 Likes

Yeah when I search just “skunk” it comes up as the first option…

3 Likes

There seems to be a recent influx of seemingly random observations labeled as the genus Aa (yes, that is a real taxon name). At first I thought it was an issue with the computer vision or misidentification on the observers part, but it seems unlikely that that is the case given the content of the observations (ranging from lichen to something that I think is a moth) and the fact that they seem to be coming from fairly experienced users. I suspect that the issue is due to some kind of alphabetical sorting system that is part of the taxa list or something (I don’t really know how the system works so I am just guessing here).

5 Likes