Speaking from the perspective of the Hong Kong uploads, I have noticed a good portion of the Lepidoptera uploads (mostly excluding Papilionoidea) contain ID’s for species not found in Hong Kong. Usually they would be some moth found in the USA. This issue typically seems to arise from the iNat AI in the visually similar part in “suggest an identification”. Typical red flags for me would be just one location pin in Hong Kong and a bunch of other pins elsewhere (but then again one would have to take into account how cosmopolitan the species is). Usually I would send a comment in the lines of “when making an ID please consider the distribution of each species”, but likely to no avail.
For something like moths, many species look so similar in terms of their morphology, I wonder how useful species suggestions are if the underlying algorithm is not optimised enough. In that case this issue may stem from the (because I can’t think of the right word) coding side, in that the code have not factored in the species distribution to make a more informed ID suggestion. Then again, coding this will be extremely challenging.
On the other hand, this may be an issue of how diligent users are in terms of ID’ing their species. Sure, if we want to prevent this from happening we could make the user experience more restrictive (eg. make location mandatory so that the algorithm can then restrict itself into providing ID suggestion for that region), but I wonder how effective that may be in the long run.
Edit: just found an example of what I meant.