I use both the iNaturalist app and the Seek app (which I use mainly for getting a quick id on weeds in my garden) but I keep the two separate. I have noticed that sometimes, where the iNaturalist app will only suggest to the genus level, Seek will readily identify to the species level using the same image. I had assumed that they would both use the same database. Curious as to why this is the case. I confess I will happily manually enter Seek’s more specific suggestion when submitting an observation if iNaturalist doesn’t.
3 Likes
I use the Seek ID as a point of comparison, as CV isn’t always right, in either app.
I use Seek for its faster (sometimes) answers in the field and I like what the Seek camera does with my clip on lens. I rarely upload observations from the field.
I have no idea why they aren’t the same.
1 Like
Seek is using an older version of the CV (unless you’re using the offline version in the new iPhone app), and I think it is meant to give a species ID. So I would consider the iNat app generally to be more accurate.
8 Likes
Yes, Seek and the new app in offline mode use a smaller model that can fit on a phone. This is updated less frequently. The apps/webpage use the full, current model. If you have access to suggestions from both, the iNat app will generally be more useful/reliable as it includes more taxa.
4 Likes
Do they use geographic boundaries or time boundaries ? And the (offline) Seek model is differnt from the offline model of the new App?
The most recent versions of Seek and iNaturalist use the geomodel.
Both are using 2.13.
2 Likes
I’ve found that Seek often is far less specific than are iNaturalist’s suggested identifications. More than once after Seek has identified a plant as a “dicot,” I’ll switch to iNaturalist for a suggested identification that includes both genus and species.
1 Like
Because Seek can only give you one ID suggestion, its confidence threshold is set pretty high.
2 Likes