Hi Brett,
In March the team released changes to our suggestions UI to exclude suggestions of taxa that do not occur nearby by default. (See https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/better-use-of-location-in-computer-vision-suggestions/915/47?u=loarie for more info). Users now have to choose “show suggestions that do not occur nearby” in order to even see non-nearby suggestions.
Have you not seen a change in this regard?
Thanks,
alex
The “pretty sure” suggestions still don’t take location into account, so you can get a “top” suggestion of a genus that doesn’t occur on the same continent. I live in the US, where frequently this feature works well for me - if the top species is a European one, the genus is often still right for the US - but not always! And I can only imagine how it its in other places in the world.
I think that the species-level suggestions are filtered to “seen nearby”, but that higher level suggestions such as genus are not. Seems like ideally they should be!
Hi Chris,
We are working on further improvements from the UI & algorithm side of things as well as the modeling side, but we don’t have anything to share yet.
Cheers,
alex
btw - I made and then deleted an earlier draft of this post because I realized I’m not 100% confident in my knowledge of how we’re using geofrequency right now, and I didn’t want to misrepresent anything. So someone else from the team will have to chime in on that.
Is the number of photos per taxon still capped at 1000? It seems like for some taxa thats plenty, while for some there could easily be enough combinations of completely different appearance based on life stage/habitat/sex that 1000 might not be sufficient to adequately sample the range intrinsic variation. I wonder if the cap could be adaptive somehow?
tbh if a taxon has that much variability someone needs to make a new species concept… or else the CV cannot reasonably be expected to ID it.
I mean like various combinations of sex+egg/larva/pupa/juvenile/adult+‘evidence of presence’ observations, which can all look nothing whatsoever alike, could mean you get less out of 1000 pictures for some species vs something like a bison where its just different sizes but they all look more or less the same.
The ‘evidence of presence’ type observations are a pretty big wild card. Just curious, does the model look for variation in the photos it chooses? For example - pulling out feces, footprints, terrain/plant damage, bones, etc for elephants as well as a lot of clear-through-blurry images of the animals themselves?
When the model is finished will there be any kind of post with a list of the newly included genera?
It does work, you just need to clear out all the wrong ids first, which is not going that well/fast from what I can see, really, iders in e.g. US would need to spend a day or two just looking for wrong ids and reiing them or marking plants as cultivated, which for some reason isn’t happening while these plants contribute to “seen nearby” pool.
Agreed. I didn’t know about this whole leaves thing with the CV before, and it explains probably the majority of invertebrate CV problems I know of.
It’s more than a complaint. It’s a fatal design flaw.
You can find it for a taxon separately if it is added to the CV-model, but as far as I know there is no filter to see a taxon list only with cv-added taxa e.g. here https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa.
But iNaturalist can return species which are in the database and not in the model. I have no idea of this label is shown for these cases.
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/13858-Passer-domesticus
If there is no default wiki for a taxon - then the default text says - so many obs for this species.
How can we see how many obs there are for a Pending species with wiki text?
Since the line you’re referring to just means number of observations on iNaturalist and isn’t strictly related to computer vision, that number is also listed on the top right of the taxon page above the graph.
This number is of Needs ID/RG observations (aka “verifiable” - bad name) and excludes Casual ones.
To view the total number of observations of any species, from anywhere on iNat, search for it in the top right search bar, click View Observations, then uncheck the box next to “Verifiable” in the Filters.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?taxon_id=635324&verifiable=any
You may need to switch off your default region to see the “world” total.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
