It did it again…
This time it wasn’t immediately.
Maybe it just displayes the trace of others wrong? Like, five poeple submitted it (very shortly after I did) and had a different trace?
Maybe it’s actually 0% acccuracy, but it doesn’t show as incorrect?
I don’t know…
Hi:
I am very new. 24 hours young.
I found this on a review. I just wondering if it is right, or all right. Thanks:
Another View:
1 Like
Hi, welcome to ew! That looks like a merger, see how in the 2D in 1st pic the red are outside the borders of the green stuff? That’s no good lol, it’s what we call a merger. (do !merger in chat for more info on them).
Hope this helps.
Thank you Nseraf:
Being new, I did not want to jump in and assume that. Reading about mergers, that’s what it looked like. I have had tracing reviews mark me wrong for not marking some of the same.
This is a great thing. A game that means something. I must remember to look up the forum maker, it’s great also.
I am looking up mergers now. Thanks again.
03:32 am – Followed WiKi directions and mailed Merger to support.
Thanks again. Keep up the great work! 
1 Like
youre welcome 
you can also ask for merger assistance in chat
CUBE #2868482 Theres a small piece at the end that the consensus got wrong, pretty sure. It’s marked in red here. Note that my 2D is rotated axis. The AI probably missed it because of the one bright slide.
This is two questions, Am I right and are these tiny mistakes worth reporting? I imagine this would get found and corrected in some future stitching operation.
that’s actually a piece previous ppl missed but you added, it’s not a merger so your % in your profile should be ok, and report any mergers yeah but this is what we call dust so this missing doesn’t need reporting but if you have anything large then feel free to report and someone should reap it in.
Hope this helps.
Thanks for your clear answers.
1 Like
it’s not an “exact science” lol, but altho it’s a large dust it is dust b/c it doesn’t add to the shape of the neuron, here’s a couple of examples of what usually is reaped in by scythes:
missing branch:
missing nub:
now, branches and nubs are not exactly “if it’s this large add if not ignore” they can be smaller or larger but they add to the shape of the neuron if added.
Also that red in your cube is a merger, I’ve marked pic yellow for seed and red for additions, can you see the -faint- borders between them?
hope this helps.
errrr
artifact in slide probly.
1 Like
Hi dudes, I think there is a mistake. Check it:
(Hola chicos, creo que hay un pequeño error. Echadle un ojo:)
Am I wrong or this red colored part have to be green?
(Estoy equivocado o la parte coloreada de rojo debe ser verde?)
indeed, someone missed the dust seg lol, you are right it belongs, but dust goes missing like…in every cube lol and other than minute - in your accuracy it has little to no scientific value (you should add it when playing, it’s just not as important to add after if missing for scythes)
Hi! Looks like a bug or did I miss something?
Traced and submitted a cube (#3290188) and got this result:
At the beginning the most of currently red area was blue (seed), but after submit it’s marked as incorrect, though I couldn’t even edit this. How could it be?
Hi @varrry
Sometimes if there is a merger in the parent or the AI for some other reason are sure the segments are correct it can give out wrong merger segments out as a seed. When a scythe find cubes like that they will reap away the wrong segment (scythes can also edit the seed when reaping). Usually you will not get assigned cubes that are reaped by a scythe, but if it got reaped while you was tracing the cube it can happen, and you will see that part of the seed is marked as wrong. Your accuracy will not be affected by the part of seed that is wrong, but anything you traced out from that part of seed will make your accuracy go down.
Feel free to ask any more questions you have in the in game chat. then you will usually get a faster response.
Thanks for clarification! it really was reaped.
how come neurons have dataset borders and not just go on until they’re finished?
Because the dataset edges are the actual edges of the retinal sample imaged.
1 Like
Is it possible to image further out?