Does the computer vision suggest different taxa depending on the user?
I have recently seen a certain number of wrong IDs by one user that were suggested by the AI. These were observations of taxa that could have been “easy” to be identified and pretty common in that area.
The AI did not suggest the same wrong ID when I asked.
So I wonder if, at least sometimes, the AI takes into account who is asking to make suggestions for the ID.
There’s also a difference between using the inaturalist app/website and using seek. The image recognition built into seek is less capable than the main one (as far as I know).
The CV suggestions can change over time as more and more species are included in the database. E.g. it may have suggested something different two years ago than what the top suggestion is now.
It’s also possible that maybe the user had chosen to include suggestions not seen nearby.
In the meawhile, this user is still identifying in a bizzare way plants, while I do not receive the same suggestions by the AI. Maybe he is really using seek.
For that first example, I finally found the “Seek” phrase in the lower right under “Copyright Info and More…” but I fail to find any analogous phrase on the observation page for that second one. Where are you seeing that phrase, “This observation was created using: iNaturalist iPhone App”?
I’m looking at these on the website on a Mac using Google Chrome.
Why and how and which ID’s that have been added to the observation are used? I was surprised to find out that a photo with a lichen and a mosses Computer Vison returned a moss if a moss-id was added and in a lichen if a lichen-id was added.
yes, this is a known way of ‘manipulating’ the suggestions. So if you photograph an insect on a flower, you can add an initial ID of either insects or flowering plants (or a finer ID within either category), and the CV suggestions will then be different