IRC chat on Tuesday! Join us December 11, 2012, 11am California time, 19:00GMT, for our weekly 30 minute setiQuest IRC chat at irc://irc.freenode.net/#setiquest
Or in a browser: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=setiquest
Today's topic can be:
[11:00am] jrseti_: Hello! It is 11am
[11:00am] lnigra joined the chat room.
[11:00am] jrseti_: Hello Lou!
[11:01am] lnigra: Hello jrseti and sigblips
[11:01am] jrseti_: I think it is just us 3
[11:01am] sigblips: Hi there Jon and Lou.
[11:01am] jrseti_: http://setiquest.org/forum/topic/community-meeting-2012-12-11
[11:02am] lnigra: I see i'm up...
[11:02am] jrseti_: I thought this was interesting: http://setiquest.org/forum/topic/seti-contravenes-health-and-safety-regu...
[11:02am] sigblips: 2) Question about SETI Live not being on the Zooniverse homepage.
[11:03am] sigblips: 3) Has Voyager been seen again?
[11:03am] sigblips: That's it for me.
[11:03am] jrseti_: OK - Lou - any update for us?
[11:04am] lnigra: SETILive: No news yet on zooniverse/SETI Institute discussions about it's future, but it's on the agenda in the coming weeks.
[11:05am] lnigra: I'm working on cleaning up followups making sure we don't trigger in inappropriate situations or trigger duplicates.
[11:06am] lnigra: Also refining the timer for followup deadlines with jon's and jane's help
[11:07am] lnigra: Also working on making the number of classifications adaptive to the number of people online...
[11:07am] lnigra: We run out of the 12 subjects pretty quickly when there are a lot of people classifying. The number required is geared toward low usage right now...
[11:08am] lnigra: So, the 12 waterfall sets get their quota of user classifications very fast.
[11:08am] lnigra: Nothing else to report right now.
[11:09am] sigblips: Are followups working? I still haven't got one yet.
[11:12am] lnigra: We get several to many per night every night it seems. Maybe you're classifying when there are only a few others?...
[11:12am] lnigra: Not sure. I still haven't analyzed the followups we've generated to see if there are patterns on when and number of users.
[11:12am] lnigra: They are working...
[11:12am] sigblips: OK, thanks.
[11:13am] lnigra: We've triggered up to two levels, I believe. Up to ON2, I think. The quantity and level will probably come down when I tweak the logic.
[11:13am] lnigra: Although if I can get a good algorithm for adapting to number of users, that may allow more during slower times.
[11:13am] jrseti_: That's great, though. An actual followup
[11:14am] sigblips: So does a followup physically move the dishes to an OFF target, electronically move the beamformer to OFF, or just take a second look at that frequency?
[11:15am] lnigra: Yes, but I'll withhold final judgement until I can get around to analyzing the markings and such on the followups we have.
[11:15am] lnigra: A followup observation could be ON or OFF...
[11:16am] sigblips: Are you saying there are two types of followups?
[11:16am] lnigra: When ON, it's essentially another look at the frequency that the signals expected to be at based on the original frequency and measured drift....
[11:16am] jrseti_: The dishes do not move, the beam former just looks at a different location
[11:17am] lnigra: When OFF, all three beams are shifted (electronically, I presume) off the targets and we look to see if we stil see something or not...
[11:17am] lnigra: If not, that's a positive result. If so, that means it's almost certainly RFI or an amazing coincidence.
[11:18am] lnigra: After the initial detection, ON and OFF are alternated up to four or so times or until a negative result.
[11:20am] lnigra: I think that's correct. right Jon? Thanks for the confirmation of beam OFF movement being electronic.
[11:20am] jrseti_: Yes, correct
[11:21am] lnigra: I'll just say, in spite of my scientist skepticism, it definitely is very cool that we're producing followups pretty much every day. I'm actually pretty sure most are fully legit.
[11:22am] jrseti_: Is it working well enough that we should publicize?
[11:24am] lnigra: I don't know about "publicizing". I plan to post an update to Talk and the Blog once I get a chance to analyze some of them if that's what you mean.
[11:25am] lnigra: We'll probably also send a mass email to all users about then as well. Is that what you're thinking?
[11:25am] jrseti_: yes
[11:26am] lnigra: Yeah, I feel bad that it's taking so long for me to get all this in place - tweaking the triggering logic, analyzing the followups. but it'll get there.
[11:26am] jrseti_: It would be good to have it mentioned on zooniverse.org
[11:26am] jrseti_: (thats item 2)
[11:27am] sigblips: 2) Question about SETI Live not being on the Zooniverse homepage.
[11:27am] lnigra: Oh, yes, you brought up it not being on the main page. I don't know yet, but...
[11:27am] sigblips: It is on the Experiments in the Lab page and it's not even called SETI Live. What does this mean?
[11:28am] lnigra: It's one of the things I'm bringing up in the discussions we'll be having in coming weeks.
[11:29am] jrseti_: that would be good
[11:29am] sigblips: Zooniverse just launched The Andromeda Project and Snapshot Serengeti. They have a lot of projects going.
[11:29am] lnigra: It may simply be that it only recently is coming close to being truly functional with followups working properly, so if that's the only thing, we should be able to move to the main page soon if it's going to continue as a project.
[11:29am] jrseti_: lnigra: I assume that is the reason.
[11:30am] lnigra: Like I said, we'll find out soon enough. Yes, lots of projects. That's been consuming the team here since summer.
[11:30am] sigblips: I doubt that since a number of projects on the Zooniverse front page are less functional than SETI Live.
[11:30am] jrseti_: good point!
[11:31am] lnigra: I don't agree with that exactly. Followups is an essential function for SETILive. The others are basically functional.
[11:31am] sigblips: SETI Live has been functional for many many months.
[11:32am] lnigra: No it hasn't. Followups haven't been functional for many months. Without followups, it's not really working.
[11:33am] lnigra: It's a matter of what the criteria for "functional" you use, I guess.
[11:33am] jrseti_: I'd rather be conservative and not tell too many people until we are confident it works well. We really jumped in too fast a year ago and told too many people, when it really was not working well.
[11:33am] lnigra: Right on the mark, jrseti.
[11:34am] jrseti_: Functional is now "followups are really working"
[11:34am] sigblips: Yes I agree that followups are important but wasn't user classifications of RFI the primary goal of SETI Live?
[11:34am] sigblips: or the initial goal?
[11:35am] jrseti_: I think it is equally both. RFI classification is useful, followups are more interesting
[11:35am] lnigra: Right again jrseti.
[11:36am] lnigra: Without followups the "Live" in SETILive is not quite true. There is no "SETI" actually either without followups.
[11:39am] lnigra: BTW, I just asked my boss and he confirmed what jrseti and I are saying. We need followups to work to get out of the lab and...
[11:39am] jrseti_: Hopefully we are close
[11:39am] lnigra: he's happy to move it there once we're sure it's working properly.
[11:40am] lnigra: I think we are.
[11:40am] jrseti_: Wanna talk about Voyager?
[11:40am] jrseti_: We saw it last week, but it was dim
[11:41am] jrseti_: Sigblips: If you remind me, I can send you the data from tomorrow's Voyager observation
[11:41am] sigblips: That's good. So being able to find Voyager is a trend now?
[11:42am] jrseti_: We try to do it every Wednesday at noon
[11:42am] sigblips: Yes but being able to find it is new. Right?
[11:43am] jrseti_: No, we've been able to do that since I started working here
[11:44am] sigblips: I thought this past November was the first you've been able to find Voyager for a long time.
[11:45am] jrseti_: We tried seeing it several times over the summer, and did not see it. We did not look into the reason. We now have decided to try each eek, and so far we have been successful. 2 weeks ago we could not see it, but we think it was too close to the sun.
[11:47am] sigblips: The Voyager forum thread is still going. http://setiquest.org/forum/topic/baudline-analysis-voyager-1-redux
[11:48am] sigblips: I wonder if Gerry is getting interested in a wider bandwidth collection of it?
[11:48am] jrseti_: The discussion between you and Rod is interesting
[11:48am] jrseti_: Rob
[11:49am] sigblips: Yeah, Rob has been doing a lot of calculations and sleuthing work.
[11:51am] jrseti_: that is great
[11:51am] jrseti_: Funny how there is no clear explanation of the Voyager signal available from NASA
[11:52am] lnigra: As sigblips said last week, it sort of makes sense that they wouldn't want to expose themselves to spoofing.
[11:53am] sigblips: Some stuff is documented and some stuff is not. I really think they do that on purpose because of hackers.
[11:53am] jrseti_: maybe
[11:54am] jrseti_: anything else to discuss?
[11:54am] lnigra: not here.
[11:54am] sigblips: Nope.
[11:54am] jrseti_: ok, talk to you next week! Thanks!
[11:55am] sigblips: Bye all.
[11:55am] lnigra: bye
[11:55am] jrseti_ left the chat room. (Remote host closed the connection)
[11:55am] lnigra left the chat room. (Quit: Page closed)