Thank you for the follow up. What about all of the other encounters on the page? The ones I tested that have been previously approved and in some cases matched I was not able to run a rematch for them. Do we need to rerun identification on all other previous bulk uploads if we wanted to rematch them.
If we don’t rerun the identification on these will they all be matched properly with new uploads?
Also should we change our naming convention for future bulk uploads and if so can you provide guidance on that.
Are they from different bulk imports? If so, you can go to the summary section of their bulk import page to restart identification.
You can do this anytime a match results aren’t displaying correctly from an imported set of encounters. If you’re not sure which bulk import an encounter came from, you can look at the Metadata section of an encounter and look for the link that says “Imported via [IMPORT ID]”. Clicking that will take you to the bulk import where you can send those encounters back through identification.
If they’ve already gone through identification previously, you shouldn’t have to. But if you want to re-run identification anyway just to see what new potential matches appear since their initial upload, I encourage it.
You’ll want to avoid special characters going forward. If it’s not A-Z, a-z, 0-9, space, or period, it’s a special character and may not play nice when uploaded. All of your file names should be distinct. We recommend using a file name convention that starts with the date so that all of your image names are unique.
So for encounters that are in on the platform where match results are not currently displaying properly if we don’t restart identification they will still try to match with new uploads ok? But we can restart identification if we want to try to rematch them directly.
Or are these errors something we have to go back and check for regularly on all encounters to make sure all images are being used to match against new uploads?
From what I can see most if not all of the encounters are currently not displaying match results properly.
No, not at all! Match results are just a snapshot in time of the matches that were available at the time the identification was first run. If matches appeared correctly when you first uploaded them but then don’t load correctly months later, you don’t need to re-run them unless you want to compare against any new photos that were submitted since your first upload. I’ve noticed this with my own older submissions in IoT.
It’s not a perfect experience, but part of the growing pains as we work to improve our products.
Hi Anastasia,
Sorry for the continued follow up just trying to make sure we have everything ok to continue to move forward.
When I look at our bulk imports
the last two don’t have Indentification listed in the last column and they don’t offer the option to “Send to Identification” Is there a reason for this?
Thank you
But what does that mean. Those encounters can never be rematched? Is that correct? I thought we could always rematch encounters? Are they being matched with new encounters that are uploaded?
I was only referring to re-running matches on the images from those specific bulk imports. Those can always be re-done from the encounter page regardless of when it was imported.
You can. In the case of the 2021 bulk imports, you can re-run matches from the encounter page since the option is gone to do it from their bulk import pages.
GrouperSpotter will always review newly submitted encounters against all potential matches currently in its database. I think the part that may have caused confusion in my explanation earlier is in what it means to re-run matches on past encounters.
Let’s say an image of grouper 1 was uploaded in 2021. The matches for it that show up after uploading are based on a segment all of the images in the database that exist at that time. Now grouper 2 is uploaded in 2023. Its potential matches also include a segment of all of the images that exist in the database up until that point, including grouper 1.
Grouper 1’s matches from 2021 don’t have to be re-run unless the uploader wants to compare it against any new photos that were uploaded between then and now. If someone at some point determined that grouper 1 and grouper 2 were the same individual, that would be reflected in GrouperSpotter, even without re-running matches on that first encounter where grouper 1 appeared.
Let me know if that explanation helps or if i’ve just made it unnecessarily confusing.
Hi Anastasia,
Unfortunately more issues. The two bulk uploads that were still unapproved 2014 and 2015 are showing match errors again. They were ok a few days ok. I tried to send the 2014 one to identification but received an error for that as well…
Just an update the bulk upload from 10/25/22 seems to have successfully been sent to indentification but the one from 9/16/22 shows and error. And the questions still remains why do they both have match errors again?
The 2014 Encounters show the error message of “inspection image unavailable (likely outdated)”
The 2015 Encounter are ok again because I reran the identification.
I see the images loading for me in this one now, though they didn’t when you first posted it.
I see there’s been a sharp uptick in pending jobs in GrouperSpotter today (approaching 1000 as of right now) so I’m going to recommend a “wait and see” approach on these, at least until the queue goes down and we can rule that out for causing matching issues.
So the 2014 bulk upload… 5b49bd20-e9c8-438a-ae00-2aaca7f95db4
is still showing errors and I can’t seem to rerun identification for that one. I keep getting an error message. Can you explain this?
Hi Anastasia
I tried to rerun a match from an individual encounter from the two bulk imports that no longer allow for re identification because you said they were too old and I was not able to rerun that match. I received the same fetching results error message. Is there another way to fix the error on these. I’m afraid that all of our currrent bulk imports will eventually reach a stage where they can no longer be rerun as a match with how the platform appears to be working.
