Icon for: Andrew Huynh

ANDREW HUYNH

University of California at San Diego
Years in Grad School: 2
Judges’
Choice
Community
Choice

Judges’ Queries and Presenter’s Replies

  • Members may log in to read judges’ queries and presenters’ replies.

Presentation Discussion
  • Small default profile

    Gilly Puttick

    Guest
    May 21, 2012 | 04:59 p.m.

    I particularly admired the clear way you explained your data analysis methods – great narrative and visuals!

  • Icon for: Andrew Huynh

    Andrew Huynh

    Presenter
    May 22, 2012 | 12:29 p.m.

    Thanks! It took many more iterations then I would have ever thought to get right in the end.

  • Icon for: Teresa Wang

    Teresa Wang

    Trainee
    May 21, 2012 | 06:31 p.m.

    Hey Andrew, this is an awesome application of density based clustering. It also goes to show how powerful it can be to harness input from the masses. Best of luck!

  • Icon for: Andrew Huynh

    Andrew Huynh

    Presenter
    May 22, 2012 | 12:28 p.m.

    Thanks! Density based clustering is only the beginning! We discovered some interesting tidbits about people as they cluster around locations which we hope could help gleam more precise data out of future crowdsourcing datasets.

  • Icon for: Ashley Richter

    Ashley Richter

    Trainee
    May 21, 2012 | 10:54 p.m.

    Excellent dissemination of your complex and delightfully interdisciplinary data! I particularly loved your use of the phrase ‘citizen scientist,’ and its preceding alliteration. Brilliant work!

  • Icon for: Andrew Huynh

    Andrew Huynh

    Presenter
    May 22, 2012 | 12:35 p.m.

    Thanks! I’ll keep in mind to attempt alliteration anytime an occasion arises.

  • Icon for: Samantha Stout

    Samantha Stout

    Associate
    May 22, 2012 | 04:01 a.m.

    Very clear and concise! I liked the logical flow of the narration and the video clips were well placed. Great work!

  • Icon for: Glenn Page

    Glenn Page

    Evaluator
    May 22, 2012 | 11:48 a.m.

    Greetings Andrew – well done – this looks great – what are the next steps?

  • Icon for: Andrew Huynh

    Andrew Huynh

    Presenter
    May 22, 2012 | 12:25 p.m.

    We’re experimenting with using the locations and clusters as a training set to a machine learning algorithm. By using an algorithm that is open to a little ambiguity, we’re hoping that humans reveal some underlying patterns in problems that can be undefined and ambiguous — hence, defining the undefined.

  • May 23, 2012 | 10:09 a.m.

    very artistic and beautiful narrative. Best of luck in the contest -Liz Torres

  • Icon for: Thomas Levy

    Thomas Levy

    Faculty
    May 23, 2012 | 04:23 p.m.

    Excellent presentation of important cyber-archaeology research.

  • Icon for: Alan Rabideau

    Alan Rabideau

    Faculty
    May 23, 2012 | 07:57 p.m.

    Very nice presentation. Could you explain who the “citizens” were, how they were presented with the opportunity to participate, and on what basis they identified promising locations? Thanks!

  • Icon for: Andrew Huynh

    Andrew Huynh

    Presenter
    May 23, 2012 | 10:11 p.m.

    Hi Alan,

    The citizens were normal people brought to the site through the National Geographic website or press releases.

    The basis in which they identified promising locations was completely up to them! Archaeological anomalies come in all shapes, sizes, and colors so we can not concretely define what the participants needed to look for and instead relied on their perception and cognitive skills to make that decision for us.

    Hope that helped!

  • Icon for: Pamela Allen

    Pamela Allen

    Associate
    May 24, 2012 | 01:36 p.m.

    Great introduction to cyber archeology and your methods of dealing with such a dynamic data set. Really accessible presentation. I enjoyed it.

  • May 25, 2012 | 12:25 a.m.

    You did a great job explaining your research!

  • Small default profile

    Ken Noto

    Guest
    May 28, 2012 | 08:42 p.m.

    Interesting, but I’m sure there were plenty of major anomalies found in this area. Of the major ones, how do you prioritize them into ones you want to definitely investigate or not?

    Is there a way you can harness the masses to perform further investigation of the major sites?

    Getting the “masses” involved is a grand idea, but it also brings into the equation amateur archeologists and tomb raiders. How do you prevent this data from being used by them?

    One last note – there are many sites in the USA that need protection, why don’t you research them?

  • Further posting is closed as the competition has ended.