Tetragnatha used to reach research grade at genus, but we now get C.V. suggestions at the species level. I accepted some suggestions, and these new, unconfirmed species IDs are automatically research grade. I believe they should revert to unconfirmed.
Isn’t it because it’s marked “no, it’s as good as it can be”? If you mark that it can be improved, it will go back to needs ID.
That - good as can be - was probably added at genus.
But DQA remains as set - regardless of other IDs being added.
Observations don’t automatically become research grade at genus level.
If the ID is above species level, they only become research grade if someone clicks the box “ID cannot be improved” in the DQA. Generally IDers only do this if they know that distinguishing the species is not possible based on the photographic evidence (e.g., requires genital examination or whatever).
The use of this box is not (or should not be) dependent on the CV suggestions and what species it knows, but on the IDer’s knowledge of the species in the area and what features are required for ID.
In other words, even if there have been some additions to the CV training set with the result that it now has some species suggestions whereas it only was able to suggest a genus before, this does not necessarily mean that the ID for your particular observation can suddenly be refined further than it could before. The improvements to the CV are great, but its suggestions always need to be assessed critically – i.e., by checking for similar species and how and whether these species can be distinguished. My experience is that for difficult groups, the species suggestions are often rather arbitrary and based more on idiosyncracies of the photos in the training set rather than relevant morphological features.
So before accepting the new CV species suggestion, you might instead ask the user who checked the box “ID cannot be improved” about their reasons for doing so.