Chat

discussion

Version 2 Feature Requests

Started by mschwamb
Default_user
almost 6 years ago

Is ther an app for iPad. Unfortunately when planet hunting on the iOS it is not possible to click and drag the transit window.

Default_user
almost 6 years ago

The only thing I would ask for is to be able to zoom on the x-axis using the mouse wheel - it would vastly increase productivity if there were shortcuts for manipulating the graph (like the arrows/wasd suggestions earlier), rather than just the click-and-drag methods currently available. They're great for getting to grips with it, and I understand the time/code limitations, but shortcuts would be useful!

Default_user
almost 6 years ago

I notice that there seems to be some confusion over what transits look like, this may be leading to star variability being miss identified as transits. A more extensive flash based training program that shows people several transits, eclipsing binaries and stars with no transit features, asks them to identify the transits and then tells them what they are looking at may be helpful in reducing the number of false positives you are getting.

I find it quite hard to know how to categorise the stars (quiet, regular, pulsating and irregular). To my amateur eye many stars could be placed in two or more of these sets. The example images shown in the tutorial pages are useful but I feel there need to be more to cover more of the range of patterns seen in the data. A flash program with many images that asks users to classify the star and than gives an expert classification with an brief explanation of what has prompted the expert to make the classification would be very helpful.

If both of these training programs where combined then it would be like a simulation of the real task, but with feedback, much like the every brief introduction you already have.

Inclusion of 50-100 stars in this program would be a good start towards reducing the number of false positives and misclassifications you are probably getting.

Default_user
almost 6 years ago

P.S. Just having a larger selection of images of each of the star categories on a separate page (linked from the help pop-up box) would be of great help.

Default_user
almost 6 years ago

If nobody has mentioned these before, here's a short list of issues that have bothered me for some time, and they've persisted into V2. Plus a couple new suggestions, in order of importance:

  1. In a star's Talk page, clicking View Image to get the image popup shows the wrong timing - it always starts from the current quarter's segment. So if you view a star in Q5.3, the start time will always be from the start of Q5.3, and will be from 0 to 30. Confusing because Examine Star shows a different timing convention, as 0 is taken from the start of Q1 (or Q2 if no Q1 data is available)

  2. As a possible solution to the above, I suggest changing everything to ONE universal time standard, BJD which is currently used in the Kepler FITS files, as a Modified BJD, BJD-2454833. It may even save the programmers one extra step of time conversion, which has previously been the source of some subtle bugs. Pegging the start to a particular quarter, Q1, can be misleading, as seen in the View Image glitch above. Furthermore, when one reads Kepler-related scientific literature, references to events are almost always given in the Kepler BJD convention. (I know that changing the timestamp convention will break current and past comments and discussions, but that is unavoidable)

  3. In Examine Star, when you click on Discuss this star, you are sent back to the Talk page of Q1 instead of the quarter you are in. To get to the correct quarter you have to go to View Star, which leads to the next problem.

  4. In View Star, the thumbnails are not always displayed in the correct order.

  5. Currently in Examine Star the display of the Quarter navigation bar at the top now overflows with more quarters added and the Q5 links now display at the middle of the light curve. The word 'Quarter' is in fact redundant. This navigation bar can be reformatted to read: Quarter 1 - 2.1 - 2.2 - 2.3 - 2.4, or just use Q. Better still, use a pulldown menu and reclaim some screen real estate.

  6. A connect the dots feature might be useful to show that some 'transits' that are just random outliers that happened to clump together.

  7. The little image in Examine Star that shows the Kepler CCD field is wrong. I guess nobody has bothered to check, but the entire field as shown is rotated slightly off from the true field, and because of this the star's position may also be wrong. This is only useful in very special cases if we want to correlate systematic instrument errors with light curves, e.g. the mod.out 2.3 glitch in Q2. However sometimes aberrant light curves could be explained if they are on the edges of the CCD field where they are subject to thermal instability issues.

As a programmer I accept that these features may never get implemented because of time, prioritization, system design or conceptual integrity issues, even if each, on its own, may take a few minutes to code. I know how difficult it is to make simple changes to a system that currently works, because one small change may have unforeseen consequences that take a lot of time and effort to identify.

Default_user
almost 6 years ago

I'm pretty new here so this has probably all been raised before but things I'd like to see changed are :

  • Move the big ugly speech bubble so that it doesn't cover any of the graph.

  • Move the lower right zoom slider so that all the graph is displayed immediately. I don't see why a few days at the end should be hidden by default.

  • Fix what seem to be erroneous simulations. Nearly all the simulations I'm shown refer to 'null' values and show no red indicators of any transits. [EDIT: I've since realized that these simulations actually include transits but in quarters other than the one I've been asked to analyze. I hope at least that my weighting is not affected by the fact that I didn't see any transit in the period I was shown!]

Default_user
almost 6 years ago

I would like to be able to go from an Image on the Examine star page (or the talk page) directly to a planethunter classification page for it. For instance, if I found a well-defined transit of an object (say on the simulated APH42870527) that no one else had yet, but I couldn't classify it/draw boxes, it would be nice to be able to go to a page to classify it to get credit.

Default_user
almost 6 years ago

Hi, a few of us users have made some useful suggestions over the last week for improvements into version 2 - please could someone respond from the team? TIA Mike

Default_user
over 5 years ago

Maybe this has been mentioned already here or elsewhere, but it would be helpful if when an example of an embedded earth type transit is given, the example is highlighted, please? I have seen several that haven't been highlighted and cannot spot them, and would appreciate if they were. .

Default_user
over 5 years ago

lbarbato:

I would like to be able to go from an Image on the Examine star page (or the talk page) directly to a planethunter classification page for it. For instance, if I found a well-defined transit of an object (say on the simulated APH42870527) that no one else had yet, but I couldn't classify it/draw boxes, it would be nice to be able to go to a page to classify it to get credit.

We combine user results together from the classification interface in the wisdom of crowds effect where when you combine the opinions from many people who are not experts. When you do this the group consensus outperforms an expert. For this to work though we need your initial opinion not influenced by what other people are saying that's why we don't use the star id while you're classifying and why we can't have people go from Talk to the classify interface - then your opinion is influenced and may no longer be accurate - like if people say there are transits you will look harder to find them and mark them in the classify interface - if you see something in talk and think it's a transit - mark it with #phtransit or #transit, make a collection of planet candidates - if we identify the candidate via Talk and your collection or tagging is the reason we identified it, we'll definitely give you credit.

~Meg

Please Log In to make comments.