User:TheLarry/Notebook/Larrys Notebook/2010/03/09

{| width="800"
 * style="background-color: #EEE"|[[Image:owwnotebook_icon.png|128px]] Tracking
 * style="background-color: #F2F2F2" align="center"|  |Main project page
 * style="background-color: #F2F2F2" align="center"|  |Main project page


 * colspan="2"|
 * colspan="2"|

Hiccup in Automation
Andy was complaining that a couple of the data retrieved from automation were the same. Well they weren't exactly the same. The earlier one would have a couple of more points but outside of that they were the same. So I looked into it and found that what was happening was that two microtubules were very close together. So in the first frame the program thought they were the same object. Then in a later frame they were two distinct objects. However the frame after that they combined again. So for the first frame the program would track the amalgamation of two objects but basically it would only track one of them. In the next frame it would think it was tracking a new microtubule but then it would just end up tracking the same guy again. So that is how it gets almost the same data twice.

This seems a problem with too much concentration of microtubules. And i want to write it off as such. I don't know how to fix it. I can look at the next frame as well as the current frame to see if they are the same thing. That might work.

OK I put in some ugly code that might be able to fix this. I am running it now. So we'll see soon.

I might have fixed the bug. But I have a fear that this will cause less microtubules to be tracked. Even good ones. I am gonna run the automation over night on a folder Andy studied already and see how well this works.
 * Steve Koch 01:07, 10 March 2010 (EST): My opinion is that there's always going to be some user involvement. So, if it was easy for Andy to notice the problem, then it's not a "bug" per se, and definitely not worth fixing at the expense of losing other tracks.  Andy, if you read this, what do you think?


 * }