Greetings, The only thing I could add to Kenneth's eloquent treatise is ...
I am lazy. If I could partially automate the process and save a large portion of the manual Actual Intelligence time, the faster each image takes and the less breaks I have to take due to exhaustion. There is a great explanation of program/programming efficiency in the appendix(s) of the Camel Book; I consider it a must read for lazy programmers... Thanks for listening, Fred Camel Book == Programming Perl On Sat, March 9, 2024 11:17 am, Kenneth Sloan wrote: > I have lived in both worlds. When advising CS students, I stressed doing rigorous studies and trying for full automation and rigorous testing. When advising collaborators, I stressed throwing post-doc labor at the problem and solving such problems manually. Even then, itâs essential to point out the need for testing repeatability and inter-grader agreement. > > âFully automatedâ is very expensive, when you actually need reliable results yesterday. > > âManualâ does not always guarantee correctness. > > One the third hand, measurement error is a common source of noise that can be dealt with by increasing sample size - measurement methods donât have to be perfect in order to be useful. > > Finally, both automatic and manual methods should always include an âI donât knowâ option. Both humans and algorithms should be aware of their limitations and be willing to say âthis problem is outside my range of competenceâ. > > -- > Kenneth Sloan > [email protected] > Vision is the art of seeing what is invisible to others. > > > -- > ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html > -- ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html
