[00:18] *** sigblips left irc: Quit: sigblips [00:50] *** Turingi left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer [00:59] *** deorbit joined #setiquest. [01:01] *** deorbit left irc: Client Quit [07:54] *** Turingi joined #setiquest. [07:54] *** Turingi left irc: Changing host [07:54] *** Turingi joined #setiquest. [11:25] *** Turingi left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer [14:45] *** jrseti_ joined #setiquest. [15:18] *** _Jens_ joined #setiquest. [15:20] *** _Jens_ left irc: Client Quit [16:57] *** sigblips joined #setiquest. [16:58] *** Turingi joined #setiquest. [17:16] *** Turing_i joined #setiquest. [17:24] *** Turing_i left irc: Changing host [17:24] *** Turing_i joined #setiquest. [17:24] *** jrseti__ joined #setiquest. [17:24] *** jrseti_ left irc: Ping timeout: 240 seconds [17:24] *** Turingi left irc: Ping timeout: 240 seconds [17:24] *** Nick change: jrseti__ -> jrseti_ [17:34] *** Nick change: Turing_i -> Turingi [18:23] *** moinkers joined #setiquest. [18:34] *** gagan joined #setiquest. [18:35] jrseti_: i would like ti work on telescope simulator project....can u tell me the status [18:40] jrseti_: i have done entire setup..eclipse , json and junit [18:41] *** leash joined #setiquest. [18:59] *** Michael_Mo joined #setiquest. [18:59] gagan - I saw your email. It has been such a long time, people seemed to have lost interest in it. [19:00] *** _Jens_ joined #setiquest. [19:00] <_Jens_> Hello everybody [19:00] jrseti_: i wish to enroll again....can i? [19:01] Greetings Earthlings! [19:01] gagan - yes, I'll email you today and we can discuss. [19:01] Greetz [19:02] Hello all: It is 11am California time [19:02] Hello. [19:02] The agenda is built from the discussion at http://setiquest.org/forum/topic/community-meeting-2012-01-31 [19:02] Title: Community Meeting 2012-01-31 | setiQuest (at setiquest.org) [19:02] *** janebird joined #setiquest. [19:02] Agenda: [19:02] 1) Goal of the IRC chat and SETIQuest? making data be a more central theme for setiQuest. [19:02] 2) Website issues, spam, any design suggestions or topics? [19:02] 3) Google+ [19:02] 4) The poll. let's make a new one. Anyone want to write a blog about the results of the current one? [19:02] 5) Galaxy Zoo / BETA? [19:02] Anything else? [19:03] jrseti_:ok..... [19:03] Let's roll! [19:03] OK --- [19:03] *** JIll joined #setiquest. [19:03] hi [19:04] Last week we discussed: What are our goals. [19:04] The discussion pointed to the fact that the data and the analysis of data seems to be the big attractor [19:04] Do I have that right? [19:05] I think so as a consensus of what we were attracted to, but no bottom line on the GOAL of SQ [19:05] does it cost us anything in resources to keep SonATA code published on github? [19:05] Data is important to me. What is important to other people? [19:05] Jill: no [19:05] I think, Jill, that the point was that the SonATA code was not as interesting as the ATA data [19:06] discovering a signal - anyway we can [19:06] We should keep the SonATA source code open sources and on GitHub [19:06] Micheal - just verifying that there's no cost to continuing to make it available openly [19:07] Okay. that's fine, but the goal of SQ is still needed [19:07] "Any way we can" is not a plan, of course! :) [19:07] <_Jens_> I guess everybody here wants to contribute to SETI in a way he or she can. So far only people with certain special knowledge can contribute, but that'll change soon I guess. [19:08] <_Jens_> So the goal for SQ is to make that possible [19:08] Jill: What is the "official" reason setiQuest was started? The thing you say in speeches? [19:09] Yes, that was our original broad, excellent, goal. The question is whether we have any current role in that. Would our time be better spent holding a bake sale for Galaxy zoo or UC Berkeley, for example? [19:10] it's part of the wish - to empower Earthlings everywhere to become active participants in the ultimate search for cosmic company [19:10] Jill must be looking it up [19:11] Maybe we should ask what do we want from people? A goal might pop out traversing that route. [19:11] Well-said, siggy [19:11] (may I call you siggy?) [19:11] Sure. [19:12] One thing we wanted was people to help or review or understand our source code. That did not happen. [19:12] i sent a sugestion of what we might ask for help with this morning when Jon asked for agenda items [19:12] Sigmund and the Sea Monster was a favorite TV show of mine as a kid. [19:12] Jill: Did not see the item [19:12] So, with x billion humans out there, what do we want from them. The lack of coding is sad, but not the end of the world. [19:13] jrseti - posted it to forum [19:13] where [19:14] i think we need to make our request for code help more specific - the SonATA code is pretty intimidating [19:14] jrseti- in response to your suggested agenda - i thought [19:14] I have asked. There is a group of open source project suggestions on the WiKi (that probably need to be revamped) [19:15] Jill: forum post did not "post" [19:15] argh.. [19:15] let me tyoe off line for a moment [19:15] It has been expressed more than several times in the IRC chat - coding is hard and people are busy. [19:16] and most open source projects are based on code that the coders may use themselves, not so applicable here. [19:16] Maybe that is correct. [19:16] Yes that is an issue with SonATA. [19:17] But we've all agreed it would be a miracle if even a half dozen coders showed up. [19:17] So, what about the other eight billion humans. [19:17] *** gagan left irc: Quit: Page closed [19:17] sorry, seven billion [19:18] It comes back to data, i think. If we can devise a way for more than a handful to help us analyze the data [19:18] In some form or another - don't know what that is [19:19] The goal is to allow the world to help with the search. Analyzing the data is about the only way. [19:19] Right. But is there support for SQ executing on it [19:19] FYI: I posted a new project idea at http://setiquest.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page#Open_Source_Projects [19:19] Title: Main Page - setiquest wiki (at setiquest.org) [19:20] analyzing data is only part of it - the entire framework of how you interpret the analysis and respond to it is just as important [19:20] Michael: support is minimal. So what we do has to be done with minimum support [19:20] Suggestion: [19:20] here's what i wrote this morning (sort of) [19:20] You should add http://setiquest.info to the main setiQuest page too. Maybe in one of the menus and/or the main page. [19:20] Title: SetiQuest Info Service (at setiquest.info) [19:20] I was suggesting that we make an art gallery out of some of the signals ‘siggy’ is preparing for GZ as test dataset. Then invite people to create different data visualizations of the data that might make signals more visible – the sort of thing that David Robinson did, but schemes cannot be that complex. We’d evaluate them for detectability as well as compare them to CPU requirments for current renderer. [19:21] Sigblips: I willonce I get the kinks worked out. Should be soon [19:21] I like that idea, Jill [19:22] But, as with the other ideas, such as my own game layout, or even Galaxy Zoo, then what? [19:22] I think we should post all the signals we see, with the compamp data. That will attract attention and give us an opportunity to educate them on RFI and how we spot true signals. [19:22] It's a good idea. People like looking at pictures. But transforming that eyeball gazing into something useful for the project won't be easy. [19:22] With not much support needed, it can be automated [19:23] Sigblips: it is a start. then maybe someone will be interested to help us develop something around it [19:23] One usefulness that will come out of it is educating people about the signals [19:24] Maybe we can make it a game. For example: Here is a compamp file with some RFI in it. Now what is it? [19:24] Alien or Cell Phone? Cute [19:24] but as Micheal keeps saying - there's not much support for developing that infrastructure. it is getting developed NOW for SETI Live -- so i think setiQuest should become a channel for infusing improvements into SETI Live [19:25] Jill: True, but we can't put 100% into SETI Live because if SETI Live "dies", we have nothing to fall back on. [19:25] we went to a lot of trouble to get GZ funded to develop SETI Live - and we used them because they have already demonstrated that they are the gold standard for citizen science. [19:26] i humbly submit if GZ can't make SETI Live a success - no other effort will, and we should then chalk it up to a failed experiment - machines can do SETI in a systematic way that humans can't [19:26] Nothing wrong with that. They seem like cool guys who know what they are doing. The question remains whether SetiQuest has any useful function in light of that. [19:27] Michael: yes, that is correct. If we decide 100% to go with GZ, what about setiQyest? [19:27] yes - i think we become an arena where improvements to SETI Live can be developed and vetted before being implemented by GZ [19:28] Jill: Can you explain that a bit? [19:28] So... you think Galaxy Zoo developers will go for that? It would be unusual behavior. [19:29] by its nature GZ has to be fairly hostile to 'suggestions' of improvements. they do their development in a standard way and maintain their projects with small staff [19:29] Of course. That's how I behave too. [19:30] jrseti - suppose David Robinson posted to GZ his ideas about better signal processing? what would they / could they do about that? we can try to grow a community that filters and develops incremental improvements tha GZ can then swallow [19:31] Jill: That is fair enough. A big part of that is data. Posting data, educating people about the data, educating them about the process. [19:32] Maybe education should be one of setiQuest's goals? [19:32] And we have the means now to automate posting data to the server. [19:32] I am thinking about posting the "*.archive-compamp" and waterfalls, not the data we post for GZ [19:33] We need to educate more people before we will start to get much good feedback [19:34] education has always been one of setiQuest goals [19:34] If we post new data we can generate some forum topics about the data. Along the way will come education [19:34] there are a bunch of tutorial materials on the site - i'm using some of that to write copy for SETI Live [19:35] So, back to goals for setiQuest - anything decided yet? [19:35] How many .archive-compamp files are you envisioning? What prompts them being posted? When ever SonATA sees something interesting? [19:35] <_Jens_> Who's the target audience for this education? [19:36] I think it has to be aimed at different levels. Not everyone has the same background. [19:36] Or cares to develop it. [19:36] these files are created by SonATA whenever a signal is detected. The compamp data is saved along with 8 subchannels on either side. Not that many, but depends on how noisy things are. [19:37] So, these will be more than just a lot of static [19:37] That might be more interesting than just plain noise [19:38] there will be lots of static in this - usually only one signal in one subchannel, but 16 surrounding subchannels are saved. [19:38] Jens: Good question - I would say the people that are interested in helping with the search, but have no time or resources to write code. [19:39] note also these are bands that SonATA can deal with - not the crowded bands being sent to SETI Live [19:39] Jill: Yeah - probably just want to use the one subchannel? [19:39] if you do that you preclude possiblity of recognizing broader patterns [19:40] Any signal wider than 533 Hz won't fit in a single subband. Basically that's anything wider than a narrowband signal. Or a fast drifting narrowband signal. [19:41] having said that - we don't examine the archive for broader patterns - maybe something setiQuest could do [19:41] Aliens who cannot compress their signal better than 533 Hz do not deserve our notice. [19:41] (kidding) [19:41] That would mean a low baud rate. [19:43] yes [19:43] but such patterns might help us recognize the source of the interference and schedule around it. [19:44] there is a huge amount we can learn from our archive about our signal environment - we don't have the internal resources to mine that data. [19:45] OTOH we don't have the internal resources to respond to all claims of detection of ETI signals, and i'd like to do better than seti@home which just ignores its email [19:46] They must get a flood of email. [19:46] so a self-organized and self-policing group of setiQuest volunteers who take on this functionality might be good idea. [19:46] We need to be clear about this in setiQuest.org. Be upfront, and try to educate. No email - we use the forum, maybe others will help [19:46] Jill: yes [19:47] Yes. Agreed. I offered up a scheme for that. At the end, however, there must be a commitment to look at at least one signal at at least some time, or it's just playing [19:47] also SETI Live (GZ) finally hired a data 'scientist' to work with the volunteers and their efforts to understand the sources of signals - we should leverage that too [19:47] yes [19:48] Micheal: please remind me of your scheme [19:48] Basically a feedback loop, where "hits" would get vetted by other examiners. [19:49] THe "success" of a hit would raise both its "value" and the reputation valiue of its finders. [19:50] so the difference between the setiQuest data in AWS now, and this proposed archive of stored .compamp data is that there will be at least one signal in each dataset? is this the best way to find new kinds of signals? [19:50] An algorithm would evaluate a weighted valiue for a suspected hit, and when the value came up to a sufficiently high level, it would get attention at the top [19:51] it could be - we realize that some filter has to be invoked - not many folks have worked through the raw data we supplied the way sigblips has. [19:51] Well, that is a new factor. More than a "hit" needs to be found. But still a "this is what we are looking for" could be the target [19:51] or it could be run in the reverse method: "these are NOT the droids you are looking for." [19:51] Jill: It would definitely be a faster way of finding signals. Let SonATA do the hard work, that is what it's good at. [19:51] But yes, definitely needs a filter Or filters. But the data do not care how they get looked at [19:53] but by definition, SonATA has already done the hard work and found those signals - what is the value added? [19:53] ID? A second opinion? [19:53] Education and maybe seeing signals within that data that SonATA did not see? [19:54] Either better finding or better sorting. If not, shut the program down right now. [19:54] Most of the candidates that Sonata is finding and archiving are not visible to the eye. [19:54] A second opinion - that is a good one. Maybe SonATA occasionally detects signals that are not there? [19:54] ultimately i think the value added will be the datamining that finds any correlations among discrete signals over the spectrum, across space, and time that we are now blind to [19:55] We are not making much progress on he agenda 9.9 [19:56] True, but this is really good stuff to be talking about. [19:56] yes, much needed [19:56] if we have set the thresholds correctly we should be working where we have a 50% probability of missing a signal [19:56] Jane has a good point. [19:58] perhaps this analysis can help us find a better set of threshold values - with RFI in the picture they always have to be set empirically rather than theoretically and we've not had the luxury of lots of test time prior to observations. [19:59] so post-analysis of observational results should inform of of how well we are doing. [19:59] Or you could set the thresholds so that you get a lot more false signals and then let the SETI Live army sort it out. [20:00] just the sort of scientific/statistical analysis the project leader should be doing - hmm... [20:00] Hmmmm [20:01] sigblips: with that approach we end up following up on every observation and observing efficiency crashes - though it certainly will do that at the start of SETI Live. [20:02] I have asked the SETI Live folks if there will be a BETA test. Have not heard back yet [20:02] time to start driving. thanks. bye [20:03] Hey all - time is up. Good discussion! We can post further thoughts to http://setiquest.org/forum/topic/community-meeting-2012-01-31 [20:03] Title: Community Meeting 2012-01-31 | setiQuest (at setiquest.org) [20:03] *** leash left irc: Quit: Page closed [20:03] We'll get to the other agenda items next time. [20:03] This was a really good meeting. [20:03] no reply yet - my guess is yes, but limited to volunteers they've worked with before. they are taking site mock ups to the floor of the Adler for look and feel checks [20:04] *** JIll left irc: Quit: Page closed [20:04] In the mean time, it may be good for some of us to come up with one or 2 sentences that defines a goal for setiQuest - based on today's discussion [20:04] Watch http://setiquest.org/forum/topic/community-meeting-2012-01-31 [20:04] Title: Community Meeting 2012-01-31 | setiQuest (at setiquest.org) [20:05] bye! [20:05] OK, I'll post this transcript to the forum. [20:05] bye [20:05] great [20:05] *** jrseti_ left irc: Remote host closed the connection [20:18] *** _Jens_ left irc: Quit: Bye [20:23] *** janebird left irc: Quit: Page closed [20:27] *** Michael_Mo left irc: Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88 [Firefox 9.0.1/20111220165912] [21:14] *** emijrp joined #setiquest. [21:38] *** emijrp left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer [23:30] *** moinkers left irc: Quit: Leaving [00:00] --- Wed Feb 1 2012