Did you know there is genuine dissent?
I have direct communication from some who do not like the way it is presented and are suspicious that the plan is to integrate it into iSpot.
Chris_V has managed to add some tags but not to every P@N - that is fine IF there is going to be a summary soon as to how it is accepted.
The trouble is that MOST users have no idea this is going on and discover P@N’s ‘contribution’ by accident - neither the ‘comment’ nor the tag(s) alert anyone.
The last response here from any of the P@Ns ‘promotion & support’ team is probably 18 days ago
.
There are at least two who are removing the tag in quiet protest - not everyone comes to the Forum.
I am also tiring of the two Banners that take up half my screen space EVERY time I log in.
I’m working on the retrospective tagging of observations now.
You have and I now see 45 fastcat Tags. where will this end?
I’m struggling to see what AI is going to bring to the site. Are there any examples where an ID has been changed as a result of the AI’s input ? We have many able and knowledgeable members who invariably get to the correct ID, why do we need AI on this site ? It is almost insulting.
.
I also agree with dejayM about the banners, most other sites have a ‘don’t show me this again’ tick box, can we have one please ?
.
Still no reply about the missing ‘next’ and ‘back’ buttons on the carousel
Which carousel do you mean, chrisbrooks?
Before the recode there used to be next and back buttons on all the carousels (i.e. what is presented on the home page, communities and unidentified). This allowed users to go through all the latest sightings (30 I think) one after the other and not keep having to go back to the home page each time and open the next observation. It was very useful and I know that a lot of users miss them, although only a few will remember them such is the drop out rate.
Next (please) - that option used to apply inside Observations when viewing the Photos at full size.
Are you aware there is a LIVE forum item going on right now? Not many active iSpotters are attending…
https://forum.ispotnature.org/t/reminder-help-test-the-decide-tool-join-the-second-ispot-decide-user-group-discussion/1679
“That page doesn’t exist or is private”
Sorry. Annoying…it is a link to the start of the recent On-Line Group Discussion, that works for me, even when not logged in.
But, in any case, the discussion has ended. There is a bit more to life though
Links to ended discussions
https://forum.ispotnature.org/t/iforum-live-join-the-first-ispot-decide-user-group-discussion/1594
are pretty boring really…forget it!
Back to the Thread
Is ANYONE going to summarise or respond to User Comments
Typically in here
This is my final comment in this Thread (relief)
It’s not clear to me what the objective of this integration of Pl@ntNet Identify with iSpot is - it isn’t necessary to incorporate identifications from the AI in the iSpot user experience to trial the AI.
Regardless, the way it is being applied makes that AI look worse than it is.
- The Pl&ntNet Identify global database is being used, which results in similar plants not found in Britain and Ireland being picked up. (If Lotus ucrainicus was present in Britain it and Lotus corniculatus may well be considered a difficult pair - as it is distinguishing British Lotus isn’t trivial, and these two are closer than any pair of British species.) Pl@ntNet Identify has a West European data set which would work better.
- The top 3 suggestions from Pl@ntNet Identify are being given, regardless whether the percentage probabilities are 90/5/5, 32/31/30, or even 10/7/4, which are all very different situations, and by allowing low probability IDs through exacerbates the problems of using the global database. Setting a 30% threshold would give 0-3 alternatives per observation, and eliminate the worse solecisms. (Or the threshold could be set even higher.)
- I have a strong suspicion that taxonomic differences between iSpot’s dictionary and Pl@ntNet Identify’s are being ignored. Rather than just stating that Pl@ntNet Identify’s proposed identification is not in the iSpot dictionary, it could be checked whether iSpot has it as a synonym and replaced by the name iSpot accepts if it does. (This wouldn’t have caught Tripolium pannonicum, as iSpot only has Tripolium pannonicum subsp. maritimum, but it should catch most of them.)
- Pl@ntNet uses flower/leaf/fruit/bark/habit hints, which are usually not available with iSpot observations.
- Pl@ntNet Identify is being fed red algae, brown algae, green algae, and bryophytes, but it can only cope with vascular plants.
- That Pl@ntNet Identify is setup to identify species, rather than larger groups, is a failing there, rather than with the integration.
An obvious way to “trial” the AI is to run it over every vascular plant observation in iSpot, and see in what proportion of cases the AI’s preferred identification matches the likely ID. Interpreting this number has a number of pitfalls, but you could get a better handle on it by calculating a quality grade for iSpot likely IDs (Pl@ntNet Identify has one built in - its percentage figure) and seeing how the rate of agreement varies with grade.
A variation would be to first set up a Britain and Ireland data set at Pl@ntNet Identify.
Another line of attack would be to extract a set of “research grade” observations from iSpot, and use that to train the Pl@ntNet Identify engine. Then repeat the above. However Pl@ntNet Identify’s Western Europe dataset has an average of 900 photographs per taxon; I don’t have access to the comparative number for iSpot, but a back of the envelope calculation suggests a fewfold smaller data set. So, it can’t be guaranteed that there’s sufficient data to train the engine. But it does offer an opportunity with things other than non-vascular plants.
It seems to me that you could train the engine twice - once with species, and once with genera. Then if it doesn’t give a high probability identification to species, you ask it again for genus. This would help with taxa like Taraxacum, Hieracium, Rubus, Salix, Limonium, Oenothera, Epilobium, …
I note in passing that we recently had a comments present marker added to address that problem of comments often being overlooked. Presenting Pl@ntNet Identify suggestions as a comment reduces that value of that marker.
In reply to the above comment, I have previously raised many of these issues when discussing Plantnet and iSpot internally and I am hoping that people from the Plantnet team will respond here. There are some specific technical etc reasons for doing things in this way but it does not mean they can’t be changed.
To Lavateraguy: thank you for posting this feedback. I agree with all the points you have made.
As miked says, we await a Plantnet Identify response.
Dear all
Please join us for the Cos4Cloud iSpot User Group 2nd iForum LIVE! . The focus of this session is: AI and iSpot: a spotlight on the Pl@ntNet API.
This LIVE scheduled chat discussion with the Pl@ntNet API development Team and iSpot Admin will be on Wednesday, October 12th 5:30 p.m. BST / 6:30 p.m. CEST at this link.
We are looking forward to chatting with you then!
Thanks for the link for the forum.
I trust that the comments already made here (especiially Lavateraguy’s ) will have been seen by the team and that the issues raised there, as well as other things we have already flagged, will be addressed.
They have see quite a number of the previous comments if not all inc Lavateraguys, they have addressed a number of them. It is a shame we can’t have a zoom or similar session as the immediacy of seeing them replying in person is sometimes better than typed comments.
The reply button seems to be disabled on the new discussion thread. I tried a refresh in case I was in just too early, but that didn’t bring it back.
Update: Now visible as of 17:45.
LIVE NOW!! Dear all, we managed to resolve earlier issues and the session is LIVE now, please do join us!! @ajoly from Pl@ntNet is online with us!
Dear all
Again our sincere apologies for the late changes to the second session iForum LIVE!: AI and iSpot: a spotlight on the PlantNet API which affected many of you from participating live.
AI and iSpot: a spotlight on FASTCAT-Cloud
We really do need your input giving us feedback, raising questions while testing the PlantNet-API as well as FASTCAT-Cloud in iSpot.
Please join us for the next scheduled LIVE discussion with the FASTCAT-Cloud development Team and iSpot Admin on Wednesday, October 19th 5:30 p.m. BST / 6:30 p.m. CEST. 2022-10-19T16:30:00Z
This iForum LIVE session will be hosted slightly differently to the earlier sessions. We will be facilitating discussions simultaneously via LIVE chat in the iSpot Forum as well as via a LIVE video meeting.
Joining details: AI and iSpot: a spotlight on FASTCAT-Cloud
-
Join us in the iForum LIVE chat here:
AI and iSpot: a spotlight on FASTCAT-Cloud, and -
Register to join us in the LIVE video meeting on Zoom here:
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting on Zoom. *Please note: turning your camera on and speaking in the Zoom meeting is entirely optional, you can watch, listen on Zoom and add your comments to the iSpot Forum chat.
We really hope you can participate and look forward to chatting with you in the session on October 19th!
Janice