Hey! Wondering if there is a way to filter out observations that have been IDed with the CV. I like to look at other observations for help making IDs, especially with some difficult insects. I would prefer to look at IDs made by an informed user, but there is usually tons of CV IDed observations to wade through which I have found to be often unhelpful with insects, especially outside the US. Looking at the older pre-CV observations helps with finding better quality IDs but wondering if there is another way.
I think this task is doomed to fail, as using the CV does not mean the ID is necessarily used to ID the observation. Almost all of my uploads will show the “CV used” sign.. yes, even the spiders. Just in cases where the CV does not show the right taxon I want to chose, it will be missing.. which is rather rare actually (but e.g. with Fungi, where CV seldom stays with kingdom, but I seldom.know much more)
I agree, using a CV suggestion does not mean that is your sole support, I am a power bird IDer but I often use the CV fist because I don’t feel like typing out the full name and iNat doesn’t know most banding codes which is annoying
I can’t add much to what has already been said, but I can confirm it. For most of us doing any amount of IDing, the CV icon simply means we’ve saved ourselves a bit of typing and best-guessing some pretty complicated spelling. You may also find other useful information in this recent question.
A better way to filter for what you want – would be to make a shortlist of identifiers you trust. If I want a spider ID, I often ask ajott. And for a given ‘difficult’ insect – you could see who the identifiers are, then shortlist your trusted taxon specialists.
And if it really is difficult, my ‘trusted taxon specialist’ will pull in the next one … and we get RG or good as can be with the info in these photos.
Idle curiosity. Do you always type … out … the taxon … name ?
There are few things sweeter than seeing the correct long and cumbersome species name showing as the first choice of the CV and knowing you do not have to type out the whole thing or remember how to spell it.
I observe a lot of marble bugs. (There were several between the tent cover and the tent when I took down the tent, but I didn’t bother observing them.)
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/404941496 : CV suggested several unrelated insects, probably what would be found in the trees in the background. I typed “halyo” and picked it from what came up.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/404122518 : CV thought it’s a weevil, but I knew quite well it’s a bug, and picked the first non-weevil in the list, which is the bug it is.
I recommend filtering for research grade observations instead. The second, confirming, ID is much more likely to be made by an informed user anyways regardless of whether the first has the CV badge or not.
telepathy. I think of a topic and someone posts it to the forum in the next few days. Happened twice before. Has anyone experienced this?
No haha I usually just click on the CV id rather than type it out. The trusted IDer shortlist is a good idea.
What a nice dream!
The second id is often by the identifier who has no idea at all and just click “Agree” for everything…
How often? Accuracy experiments have found consistently that RG observations are correctly ID’d at a rate higher than non-RG observations, meaning the “confirming” IDs are objectively more often correct than the initial IDs. There are certainly cases where they’re wrong (we’ve all seen them), but @yongestation is correct that confirming IDs are more likely to be correct as a whole.