Bill,

Fully aware of that :-) Yet you have asked for reports when these occur. I am 
in a far-away land to many where low-level, low confidence signals are the norm 
and not the exception. Around 40% of the 40 contacts made today with the new 
version have been > -18dB. Without the reduced confidence in-use I'd be in 
constant RR/73 loops !

In in the last few minutes I have another .... again with a /R ! You want this 
one was well?

114715 -18  0.3  825 ~  VK3VM PA6UES/R R BM44               ? a2      

I'll send that one as well as its now 2 in 60-odd minutes of operation.

73

Steve I
VK3VM / VK3SIR

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Somerville <[email protected]> 
Sent: Monday, 25 May 2020 9:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.2.0-rc2 False Decode

On 25/05/2020 12:04, Stephen VK3SIR wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I just picked  up a false decode that can be replicated when played back 
> through WSJT-X 2.2.0 rc2:
>
> 104945 -23 -0.5 1623 ~  VK3VM FH9ZZV/R ND49                 ? a2
>
> Research suggests this is not a genuine call and is definitely a false decode 
> (i.e. ND49 = middle of Southern Ocean). I have noted that many false decodes 
> in the previous version are reported with /R !
>
> As one cannot send attachments via email I'll reforward this email plus the 
> .wav file directly to Bill and Joe for further analysis.
>
> 73
>
> Steve I
> VK3VM / VK3SIR

Steve,

AP decodes flagged as low confidence ('?' marker) should always be considered 
dubious, and unless there is other evidence that the decode is genuine it 
should be ignored. Without using knowledge not obtained on air it is virtually 
impossible for the decoder to eliminate such false decodes without damaging the 
capabilities of the AP decoding mechanism. 
AP decodes of the 'a2' category are only detected shortly after a CQ call IIRC.

The FT8, FT4, and MSK144 decoders give virtually every possible message equal 
weight. The message types that allow a '/P' or '/R' (grid rover
station) prefix to a standard callsign have a 50% probability per possible 
callsign that random data will unpack as one of those prefixes, so they will be 
far more common in false decodes than in genuine messages where the expected 
likelihood is far lower.

73
Bill
G4WJS.



_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Reply via email to