Piotr
SP5QAT nám k srovnání způsobů vyhodnocení IARU UHF Contestu napsal
následující email.
Český překlad najdete dole.
|
From: Piotr SP5QAT Vladimir, This is nice comparison. ( http://www.ok2kkw.com/next/comparison_sp_ok.htm ) Ad Point 2 - I have many columns in database for each entry QSO. One of the column is Declared Number of points that is taken from the log. Another one is counted number of entries (not QSOs) from the log. I decided to show the number of Declared QSOs by participant as this is his right and obligation to declare his results (and number of QSOs as well). Let's take OL7M from your list. If you go to errors of the station you will see summary of the station: Declared number of QSOs: 464 Counted number of QSOs: 467 So you have the information here. It is not displayed on the main page but I have a Display Definition for each contest and I can display whatever I want for each contest. You can go to Received Logs for this contest and you will see different columns displayed. This information is taken from the same database. I can display Counted number of QSOs with one click of mouse :-). But let's look into those 3 missing QSOs that we do not display on the main page. 125. ERROR -- 2009-10-03 16:06 59 125 JO80FG 55 036 JO30NK 0 1. Wrong callsign. ERROR 226. ERROR -- 2009-10-03 19:49 59 226 JO80FG 59 002 JO70RB 0 1. Wrong callsign. ERROR 359. ERROR -- 2009-10-04 06:40 59 359 JO80FG 59 042 JO53UN 0 1. Wrong callsign. ERROR So participant by himself treat this entries like ERRORs. Why should we count them and show on result page giving wrong picture to others? Ad Point 4 - Polish evaluation counts the from declared points - Czech evaluation counts avg from valid points This is not true. For the same station OL7M we have: Declared number of QSO = 464 and Declared Points = 158120. Valid QSOs = 448 and Result Points = 153424. This gives real achieved km/qso = 342 for error free QSOs Czech evaluation counts: Counted number of QSO (with Errors described before) = 467 and Result Points = 152985. This gives something (I don’t know how to name it as we count number of QSOs that were not declared by participant.) km/qso = 327 Ad Point 6 - This is true in current view. This is one of the column that I can display any time with one click of mouse. Columns, especially for antenna, are rather long. From statistics the mostly used resolution of computer accessing data is 1024 x 768. I just skip this in that view. Final results will have this data available. I will also add this on the error page, which was on my list of improvements which is very long :-) The interesting thing is that difference in points (still small but can be important). If we take OL4A: QSO number: 376 with DC3PH is valid in our results and Not in the log in your results. This is interesting You can see OL4A in DC3PH log on our page: http://contest.pk-ukf.org.pl/contest.php?vid=decaa105f41e2e927dcfdd82c2a6444d&what=error_all&typ=iaru_uhf_shf&year=2009&band=432%20MHz&call=DC3PH&mark=OL4A#13 If we take OL7M: QSO number: 231 with DG1KUM is valid in our results and Not in the log in your results. This is interesting You can see OL7M in DG1KUM log on our page: http://contest.pk-ukf.org.pl/contest.php?vid=62051d2ad900da7086e4a08864a0b96e&what=error_all&typ=iaru_uhf_shf&year=2009&band=432%20MHz&call=DG1KUM&mark=OL7M#16 So it looks like something is wrong with your robot. I do not have time to go through all of the QSOs right now to compare it, but it looks like it is wrong on Czech software side so someone should look at it. Please add my comments to your page unless you totally disagree with the above information than please let us discuss first. Regards, Piotr From:
Piotr SP5QAT Vladimire, opravdu hezke srovnani. ( http://www.ok2kkw.com/next/comparison_sp_ok.htm ) K bodu 2 - v databazi mam ted spoustu sloupcu dat pro kazde vlozene QSO. Jeden z techto sloupcu databaze je sloupec deklarovaneho poctu bodu, ktery je prevzat ze soutezniho deniku. Jiny je poctem otevrenych radek v contestovem logu (tedy ne deklarovanych QSO). Rozhodl jsem se ukazat pocet deklarovanych (dokoncenych) QSO, ktere ucastnik zavodu dle jeho prav a zavazku deklaruje jako jeho vysledek (a spolu s tim take pocet QSO). Pojdme vzit z tveho seznamu napriklad OL7M. Pokud pujdes na error log teto stanice, uvidis tam prehled vysledku teto stanice: Deklarovany pocet QSO: 464 Zapocteny pocet QSO: 467 Takze tady je ta informace. Neni to sice zobrazeno na hlavni strane, ale mam vytvorenou definici pro zobrazeni zvlast pro kazdy contest a vlastne pro kazdy contest zvlast mohu ukazat, co je zapotrebi. Je take mozno jit do prijatych logu tohoto zavodu a tam uvidis dalsi deklarovane sloupce, pricemz tato informace je prevzata ze stejne databaze. Mohu zobrazit i ty "zapoctene" (resp. otevrene a nedokoncene) QSO jen jednim kliknutim :-). Ale podivejme se na ty chybejici 3 spojeni, ktere nejsou zobrazeny na hlavni strane vyhodnoceni 125. ERROR -- 2009-10-03 16:06 59 125 JO80FG 55 036 JO30NK 0 1. Wrong callsign. ERROR 226. ERROR -- 2009-10-03 19:49 59 226 JO80FG 59 002 JO70RB 0 1. Wrong callsign. ERROR 359. ERROR -- 2009-10-04 06:40 59 359 JO80FG 59 042 JO53UN 0 1. Wrong callsign. ERROR Tedy ucastnik sam za sebe povazoval tato spojeni jako neplatna. Proc bychom je tedy meli pocitat a ukazovat ve vysledkove listine a davat tak zkreslenou informaci dalsim? K bodu 4 - Polske hodnoceni pocita s deklarovanymi body, zatimco ceske hodnoceni pocita prumer z platnych bodu To neni pravda. Pro uvedenou stanici OL7M zde mame: Deklarovany pocet QSO = 464 a deklarovane body = 158120. Platna QSO = 448 a vysledny soucet bodu = 153424. To nam dava skutecne dosazenou hodnotu km/qso = 342, vypoctenou z platnych spojeni Ceske hodnoceni pocita: zapocteny pocet QSO (vcetne chyb, ktere soutezni stanice priznala, jak je uvedeno vyse) = 467 a vysledny pocet bodu, ktery je 152985. To dava neco, co neumim pojmenovat, protoze se pritom kalkuluje s poctem QSO (nebo spise poctem radek v logu), tedy vcetne tech QSO, ktere sam soutezici uznal za neplatne. Vysledek takoveho pocitani km/qso je 327 K bodu 6 - To je ovsem pravda jen podle stavajiciho pohledu na vec pravda . Ten sloupec sice mohu zobrazit kdykoli, ale protoze sloupce, zejmena ten pro antenni system jsou spise delsi, nez kratsi, narazi se potom na velikost nejvice pouzivanych displeju, ktera je podle statistickych dat 1024 x 768. Proto jsem je (v tomto zobrazeni) radeji preskocil. Konecne vysledky ale tato data budou obsahovat. Take tyhle udaje pridam do stranky chybovych logu, ktera je na mem dlouhem seznamu planovanych vylepseni :-) Zajimava je ovsem ta rozdilnost bodu. Sice nevelka, ale muze byt dulezita. Vezmeme si OL4A: Seznam QSO: cislo 376 s DC3PH je v nasich (SP) vysledcich platne, ale neplatne ve vasich (OK) vysledich. To je zajimave. Podivejme se na QSO s OL4A v deniku DC3PH, ktery je v nasi vysledkove listine k dispozici: http://contest.pk-ukf.org.pl/contest.php?vid=decaa105f41e2e927dcfdd82c2a6444d&what=error_all&typ=iaru_uhf_shf&year=2009&band=432%20MHz&call=DC3PH&mark=OL4A#13 Pokud si vezmeme take OL7M: Cislo spojeni 231 s DG1KUM je v nasich (polskych) vysledcich platne, zatimco v ceske vysledkove listine nikoli. To je take zajimave Podivejme se na QSO s OL7M v logu DG1KUM na nasi strance: http://contest.pk-ukf.org.pl/contest.php?vid=62051d2ad900da7086e4a08864a0b96e&what=error_all&typ=iaru_uhf_shf&year=2009&band=432%20MHz&call=DG1KUM&mark=OL7M#16 Vypada to bohuzel tak, ze je neco vadneho na tom vasem robotu, ktery prijima logy. Nemam ted bohuzel cas prochazet si vsechna QSO a porovnavat vysledky, ale pripada mi, ze v ceskem programovem vybaveni je neco vadneho a nekdo by se na to opravdu mel jit podivat. Prosim pridejte muj komentar na vase stranky, ledaze pokud byste ovsem s timto vyjadrenim zasadne nesouhlasili. V takovem pripade mi prosim dejte vedet, co je v takovem vyjadreni nepravdiveho. zdravim, Piotr Vzhledem k tomu, že nemáme proč nesouhlasit, uvádíme text tohoto vyjadreni v plnem zneni, jen s mirnymi prekladatelskymi upravami. Originalni text je pro srovnani uplne nahore. OK1VPZ |