Hi Scott, thanks for these stats. The forum community has generally had this impression so it would be helpful to dig into this a bit deeper:
In particular there is this thread with many feelings expressed about the readiness of Next to suggest species level for obscure arthropods and similar taxa (see also the number of threads linking to that thread, attributing this as the source of various other issues people complain about on the forum). If this is not in fact an actual problem and only “feels” like a problem then it would be interesting and helpful to know.
From your stats here I’m curious about 2 things:
- Have thresholds or anything like that been changed in what rank the Next CV suggests since it was released in 2024?
- I feel like identifiers are unlikely to have made it to many of the tougher IDs or more frustrating species for observations submitted only a month ago. For many of those species there aren’t regular identifiers and specialists might only sort through them once every few months. I’m not sure how you would detect improvements with that sub-category of observations though; they are probably a pretty small fraction of overall observations but they take a lot of attention and frustration from identifiers.