Hello, I just wanted to make a quick post encouraging people who are confidant about their identification skills to also, when they have time, go through observations that are already Research Grade and confirm their IDs too, not just ones that Need ID! It’s very simple: Sometimes observations that…

Of course one should still be rather confident of the Id and not just agree because several others did. …In the case that it stays at RG… use the “can be improved” helps…

[image] ajott: Of course one should still be rather confident of the Id and not just agree because several others did. There are two kinds of people: those who know they make mistakes, and those who don’t know that they make mistakes. :-)

If I didn’t know I make mistakes, my notifications would make that clear! Nonetheless, I strongly recommend adding a third (or other) ID to RG observations because of the negative effects if an identifier deletes his/her account – or has it deleted by a well-meaning relative after death.

Yes, many researchers do use Community IDs for RG observations as these are what gets exported to GBIF.

Lots of observers are using garbage-bin-species; usually species that are well-known, and are well presented with photo recognition… In the fungal world such species are e.g. Phellinus igniarius, Amanita muscaria and Flammulina velutipes. These include lots of wrong RG-level observations, and it is …

[image] juhakinnunen: Lots of observers are using garbage-bin-species; usually species that are well-known, and are well presented with photo recognition… In the fungal world such species are e.g. Phellinus igniarius, Amanita muscaria and Flammulina velutipes You used to be able to add such t…

Thank you for the work with Plant Phenology! Also, I agree with many of your points, and the ones in the comments. The one about deleted accounts makes a ton of sense. I’ll be linking people to this post when they get mad at me for a confirming ID, haha.

[image] sedgequeen: If I didn’t know I make mistakes, my notifications would make that clear! That could just mean that other people make mistakes. :-)

Once in a while they’re wrong, but I’m followed by some pretty good identifiers and usually the mistake is mine.

The idea is that a researcher is NOT going to RELY on community IDs, but they MIGHT form a starting dataset to look more closely at, by starting with observations that have more than TWO people confirming. There are taxa that lots of bad IDs, to find something that they MIGHT be able to use in their…

Why You Should Add IDs to Research Grade Observations

General

deboas January 6, 2023, 10:03pm 17

You used to be able to add such taxa to the list of problematic species here: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/computer-vision-clean-up-archive/7281 But it appears the wiki is no longer editable.

Topic		Replies	Views
Are concurring ID's posted to a Research Grade observation useful? General question , id	35	2500	August 13, 2022
Is a single additional ID enough to have an observation safely confirmed General	28	1443	February 7, 2024
Adding unnecessary identifications to unique observations? General	43	1358	January 6, 2025
Why are Two agreeing IDs (and no disagreeing IDs) needed to achieve research grade? General question	49	1313	February 3, 2025
"research level" not always reliable General taxonomy	61	3420	November 16, 2022

Why You Should Add IDs to Research Grade Observations

Related topics