'Needs ID' pile, and identifications

Okay, that is a good point. In that case I don’t have any more suggestions.

1 Like

It’s just different techniques for different requirements and approaches I think. Sounds like “View More” works pretty well for the way you approach IDs, and that’s great.

2 Likes

I just mark all as reviewed and hit “refresh.”

2 Likes

I just mark all as reviewed and hit “refresh.”

That works if I’m trying to identify every observation on the page to the best of my ability. If there are some I plain cannot identify, then marking them “Reviewed” is the right response.

But if I’m trawling through a page of 80 observations IDed as Class Liliopsida in Central America and giving IDs to just the 3 Tigridieae observations it would be a mistake for me to mark the other 77 as “Reviewed”. A month later when I come looking to ID Sisyrinchieae, those 77 observations would be excluded from my search.

Basically, it’s most useful to me to have “Reviewed” mean something like “I determined an ID or decided I’m never going to be able to ID this thing.”

8 Likes

Yes! That’s the way I use it, too. I consider the “Reviewed” button to be the “I never want to see this again” button. Sometimes I will want to see again many of the observations I’ve seen.

7 Likes

Yes, I use it that way as well. Although I admit it does does make it more likely I will overlook an individual observation.

2 Likes

Hmmm… I used to try to ID unknowns or local wildflowers, but started feeling abashed about some mistakes I made (when I overreached my knowledge or got too attracted to AI suggestions). I don’t recall sensing anyone setting out to make me feel abashed, but some conscientious ID people would follow up and post very educational, very detailed info about IDing in that arena that were over my head. Plus, there was often a lot of repetitive copy/pasta to do to try explain to new users how iNat is meant to work*. So, I kinda pulled in my horns. I did not mean to stop IDing, but I took a break and the time just stretched on and on.

(*afaik, there’s no visible progress -plans or status reports- for the “improved on-boarding” that could, maybe, reduce the Unknown load. )

9 Likes

Come back. What I move from Unknown to Aves or Lepidoptera often gets IDed to species while I am ploughing thru the next thousand.

11 Likes

Absolutely, yes. Recruiting additional identifiers – primarily from within the existing community, with some additional external outreach for experts in certain problematic taxa – is by far the most efficient way to help with the Needs ID pile.

I have been running IDathons and identification workshops when I’m not sick. Unfortunately, I am frequently sick. Yay, chronic illness!
However, I would be thrilled to provide guidance and some practical assistance to any other person who would like to run such events. Even a one-day event can make a big difference!

I have given similar feedback to iNat staff and they seemed receptive… But they have a lot on their plate already!

6 Likes

This is why a mix of experts and amateurs is necessary. The amateurs can sort out much of the bulk, leaving a relatively organized pile of Needs ID, with preliminary guesses given, and the easiest taxa already verified. Then an expert can come in, ID the hard stuff, and then use the “cannot be improved” button as much as is needed.

You said it even better. Sorry for the repetition, I’m going through these posts chronologically :/

7 Likes

;-;

Onboarding is a high priority for the iNat team, but after basic server stability I think

Another thing I’m working on – making resources that are beginner-friendly easier to find!

6 Likes

Absolutely. It takes experience to build skill, and skill and/or resources to make experience effective.
Some of the experts here are coming from decades of being “the big fish in the pond” and are used to being the final word. They can be brusque or even plain rude. It’s not OK, and you should do your level best to disregard them and their bad attitude.
Fortunately there are far more patient and generous experts on iNat, many of whom have posted on this very thread. If you can buddy up with a mentor in your area of interest, your learning will progress much faster, you will have a safety net for mistakes, and you’ll have a designated person of whom to ask questions.

And for you experts… If you notice someone in your area of interest who seems to be truly interested in your taxa/region, why not take the initiative to apprentice them? It’s the best possible way to review your core skills, and in the long run it will ease your ID “burden”.

10 Likes

I would estimate that at least half of all new observations are of species very common to their area. Between local observations and Unknowns, it is very very difficult to run out of easy IDs. And every easy ID will give you more experience towards your ability to recognize what isn’t common. And it will also make you better understand the variations within taxa as well.

Do not despair! I regularly ID observations from weeks, months, and years in the past. All you need is for someone sufficiently interested to come by.
And think about museum collections – items can stay there for decades until a scientist uses them again, but that does not detract from their great value :)

Did you get any responses? I feel there are solutions, but the first step towards solving a problem is raising awareness. Do your fellow spider identifiers also recognize the need? And are they willing to try to remedy it?

6 Likes

See also this brilliant wiki on keeping identifying interesting.

There is a bottleneck between Order and Family for most taxa. The generalists have done what they can and the specialists are looking at genus or species. The more people can fill in this specific gap, the better! I know @fffffffff fills this role for Pterygota, for instance.

It’s not impossible. Often it’s only a deadlock because the initial ID was made by someone who has since left. One more vote can pull the ID back to the correct category more often than you think, and then the specialists will jump in.

Let me join those who have encouraged you. Anything you can do is appreciated, and we understand that mistakes are part of learning. Everyone makes mistakes :)

8 Likes

A top-down approach like this is a good starting point. If you find yourself stuck on technical language or by a lack of gestalt, you can always try from another angle or freely skip up or down the ranks. Ironically, however, there are not that many newbie-friendly yet thorough guides for ID at a high level. It’s “too easy” for the experts so it can be neglected. However, in some cases, great beginners’ guides do exist. Usually this is the case when a taxon is popular – such as for birds or wildflowers.

Another good approach, as many species have specific limited ranges. It is actually more useful for more specific ranks and rarer species, however. Invasives in particular love to break the rules about where they are “supposed” to be. It’s their whole thing.

Through specialized and scholarly sources. Normal Google won’t bring up much. Ask identifiers in your area what sources they use ;)

4 Likes

Curiously enough, my approach for Euphorbia is nearly identical to @rupertclayton 's. But I wish to add a few caveats.

Choosing that small group can be a daunting task all by itself. If you are familiar with using the more advanced features of the Explore page you can deduce some on your own. If not, try finding a local beginners’ guide, or asking a local expert for a target group.

I also recommend this in two cases: you are new to the taxon and want to know what expert identifiers already think; or you have developed enough specialized knowle dge that you can double-check the evaluations of other identifiers.
Otherwise, the Needs ID pile is more than big enough to keep you busy.

Again, determining what the sister genera are requires a little bit of broader knowledge. You can either develop the knowledge incidentally by remaining focused, or actively look at all the observations at a higher or related clade to learn about which other genera are historically mixed up with your target taxa.

This is something which can be done at a beginner level as well for visually distinct species. eg, Ricinus communis. Sometimes you’ll need extra knowledge to agree with one side or the other, but other times it is obvious. Either work within a taxon you know excellently or one for which you have a good key.

It is fantastic, and almost exactly where I arrived, but in my opinion requires the student be properly directed towards a taxon that is realistic. It can and should be combined with the top-down / generalist approach.

2 Likes

And to conclude, I give here one of my favourite quotations from scripture, from “Verses of the Fathers” (פרקי אבות):

“The shy one does not learn and the short-tempered one cannot teach” (Avot 2:5).

think I’ve overstayed my welcome now x_x

17 Likes

There’s plenty of place where I am and I would like to see more names in notifications! It’s about 400 new observations each day, but only around 700 old ones left for me in Pterygota (from 75k last December), it seems I’m trying to hold on them as long as possible because there’re 90+k of Insect level observations, it’s insane, I don’t know why so many of them are still there, people just don’t look on those really easy to id observations, even though there’re so many people who do general ids.

6 Likes

Hey! I don’t make mistakes (says the guy who cringes at some of the ID’s he has made in the past). I do think that anyone can learn to identify. Perhaps not at a professional level, but a desire to learn accompanied by resources (mainly online) can really take folks a long way. Learn the basics, and the normal variation of the basics. Make mistakes. Take notes on responses regarding pertinent details. And so on.
Perhaps iNat could request, then compile a list of people like me who are reasonably knowledgeable about a taxon who are willing to share information. I do not claim to be an expert, but I do know a few things about Noctuid moths and am willing to share my knowledge. If I don’t know, I’ll say that. My standard response is that I’m always willing to help, but I’m not always right!
I have compiled a Wiki about some common moths (I’m always adding to it, albeit slowly), but I’m not sure how to make it more generally known.

7 Likes

ah, I tried to find that a few days ago and couldn’t get it to come up in search results! Ty

3 Likes