Human Verification Investigation / Open Climate Fix MapRoulette Project

So that’s just one of the tasks, I’ve made a couple different ones, and yeah it’s pretty big. I agree with your point about not exhausting our finite human verification. For an example of the “add-new-areas-suggested-by-ML” task, I had one challenge visible but I realize I didn’t have a good writeup of instructions for it, so I just now hid it from search. But here’s what it would look like: https://maproulette.org/challenge/4013/

There’s a problem though, I’m only able to upload 400 of my 5000 task challenge into MapRoulette, unsure why. My hunch is that if you upload your own geoJSON it dies after a while. I’ve filed a github issue, but the issue queue for MapRoulette is really large, so I’m not sure if we should hold our breath. I could try a reload but MapRoulette’s admin system is very slow and breaks old challenge links if you delete, etc.

I think I might try HOTOSM Tasking Manager to see if the whole system is faster and feels better. Otherwise we might be better off forking something and adapting it to our use case.

But yeah, I agree about the importance of the ML task verification over changing nodes to areas, I mostly made them as an investigation to see how quickly it could be done and the scale of the work. (which is slower and larger than I expected)

RE existing PV tags, for the area challenges, it should automatically filter out areas whenever the task is rebuilt, because it’s just generated from an overpass query. (But rebuilding the challenge takes a while if it’s large, so I haven’t done it yet)

For the human verification of ML challenge, I don’t currently filter by existing panels, so it’s possible the panels it wants you to add are already mapped. Filtering is in the roadmap, but not as important with Austin, as there’s really not that many existing pv panels in OSM. Also it’s a little difficult to do, because an OSM tag may be just a node that doesn’t represent the true area of the panel array, and if the node doesn’t fall within the image boundary but part of the panel does, then it’s not immediately obvious that you should have filtered that task out. (But you shouldn’t filter it out if there’s another unmapped panel on the other side of the image) So for now I’m just err-ing on the side of showing the human too many false positives, even though this might contribute to human turnover.