I read from data description:
\n\n\nNote: Labels may not be exact but are expected to be within +/-10Hz from the actual moment of contact. Labels were created in a multistep process including quality checks, however there still may be mislabels. You should expect the test labels to be of similar quality as the training set labels.
\n
But some labels look plain wrong, e.g. some players touching each other at 5yard distance?
\nWhile I understand it is expected the errors to be equally distributed in the test set, I dont get the point of leaving \"known mistakes\" ?
\nOr, is there any logic behind? e.g. the distance is not big but the sensors have failed?
", "messages": [ { "id": "2068652", "postDate": "12/18/2022 07:49:34", "content": "I read from data description:
\n\n\nNote: Labels may not be exact but are expected to be within +/-10Hz from the actual moment of contact. Labels were created in a multistep process including quality checks, however there still may be mislabels. You should expect the test labels to be of similar quality as the training set labels.
\n
But some labels look plain wrong, e.g. some players touching each other at 5yard distance?
\nWhile I understand it is expected the errors to be equally distributed in the test set, I dont get the point of leaving \"known mistakes\" ?
\nOr, is there any logic behind? e.g. the distance is not big but the sensors have failed?
", "rawMarkdown": "I read from data description:\n\n>Note: Labels may not be exact but are expected to be within +/-10Hz from the actual moment of contact. Labels were created in a multistep process including quality checks, however there still may be mislabels. You should expect the test labels to be of similar quality as the training set labels.\n\nBut some labels look plain wrong, e.g. some players touching each other at 5yard distance?\n\nWhile I understand it is expected the errors to be equally distributed in the test set, I dont get the point of leaving \"known mistakes\" ?\n\nOr, is there any logic behind? e.g. the distance is not big but the sensors have failed?", "votes": null }, { "id": "2069308", "postDate": "12/18/2022 20:51:38", "content": "Thank you for your question, @carloshuertas.
\nLabeling a dataset of this size is a complex task, and while we took steps to ensure the accuracy of the labels, it is possible that some mistakes may still be present. These mistakes, if any, were not intentional, and we would consider them \"unknown\" rather than \"known\" mistakes.
\nRegarding the large distance when contact occurs, there could be various reasons for this, including sensor delay and/or noise.
\nWe have no plans to alter or change the official data or labels, but if you come across any labels that you believe to be incorrect, please feel free to share them on the message board so that others can be made aware.
\nHope this helps to clarify things!
", "rawMarkdown": "Thank you for your question, @carloshuertas.\n\nLabeling a dataset of this size is a complex task, and while we took steps to ensure the accuracy of the labels, it is possible that some mistakes may still be present. These mistakes, if any, were not intentional, and we would consider them \"unknown\" rather than \"known\" mistakes.\n\nRegarding the large distance when contact occurs, there could be various reasons for this, including sensor delay and/or noise.\n\nWe have no plans to alter or change the official data or labels, but if you come across any labels that you believe to be incorrect, please feel free to share them on the message board so that others can be made aware.\n\nHope this helps to clarify things!", "votes": null } ], "comments": [ { "id": 2069308, "author_name": "robikscube", "author_url": "", "post_date": "12/18/2022 20:51:38", "content": "Thank you for your question, @carloshuertas.
\nLabeling a dataset of this size is a complex task, and while we took steps to ensure the accuracy of the labels, it is possible that some mistakes may still be present. These mistakes, if any, were not intentional, and we would consider them \"unknown\" rather than \"known\" mistakes.
\nRegarding the large distance when contact occurs, there could be various reasons for this, including sensor delay and/or noise.
\nWe have no plans to alter or change the official data or labels, but if you come across any labels that you believe to be incorrect, please feel free to share them on the message board so that others can be made aware.
\nHope this helps to clarify things!
", "votes": null, "replies": [] } ], "raw_markdown_by_id": { "2068652": "I read from data description:\n\n>Note: Labels may not be exact but are expected to be within +/-10Hz from the actual moment of contact. Labels were created in a multistep process including quality checks, however there still may be mislabels. You should expect the test labels to be of similar quality as the training set labels.\n\nBut some labels look plain wrong, e.g. some players touching each other at 5yard distance?\n\nWhile I understand it is expected the errors to be equally distributed in the test set, I dont get the point of leaving \"known mistakes\" ?\n\nOr, is there any logic behind? e.g. the distance is not big but the sensors have failed?", "2069308": "Thank you for your question, @carloshuertas.\n\nLabeling a dataset of this size is a complex task, and while we took steps to ensure the accuracy of the labels, it is possible that some mistakes may still be present. These mistakes, if any, were not intentional, and we would consider them \"unknown\" rather than \"known\" mistakes.\n\nRegarding the large distance when contact occurs, there could be various reasons for this, including sensor delay and/or noise.\n\nWe have no plans to alter or change the official data or labels, but if you come across any labels that you believe to be incorrect, please feel free to share them on the message board so that others can be made aware.\n\nHope this helps to clarify things!" }, "source": "meta" }