Well Dai san.
You don't need to ask for excuses.
Mine rant was really as slicing a air in four ... callsign rules and how
they apply over time are a nightmare.
BTW you have 4 errors over 62 right catches.
From your data Dai san ... (quick and dirty)
rank dx number of record
233 IW1QN 62
232 IW1Q 1
234 IW1QNN 2
235 IW1UN 1
That error number over the right catches number, BER, is more than
acceptable. It's a 6.45%, isn't?
Over the more big chunk of the data that Tomi showed us, the error rate
is quite negligible 0.68% .
From Tomi's data ... (quick and dirty)
Day of date dx Number of Records
17th IW1QN 2.157
18th W1QN 2.560
xx #4.717
18th IW1Q 8
17th IW1Q 8
xx #16
18th IW1QM 9
17th IW1QM 7
xx #16
18th IW1QNN 6
17th IW1QNN 6
xx #12
(BTW the 0.68 contain also UR 4/62 Dai san, but negligible is still
negligible, isn't?)
(May I consider that IW1UN would exist ... say hello to him ...
mumbling, but somewhere that record was pruned, isn't?)
Also the same simple operations done on raw data files for real
worldwide data (raw files on RBN) gives (even more quick and dirty and
with strings samples catted out - believe me):
17th 43/2157 1.99% error rate
18th 53/2560 2,07% error rate
A raw attempt to sum the two days gives:.
96/4717 a mere 1.97% error rate, isn't?
Some strings/data_recognize errors may apply, as I sorted RAW csv for
IW1* and then choose by hands all what may seemed to me applicable,
i.e. leaving out IW1* in CW mode (easy) and other different calls
IW1C/F and more ...
Not all mismatched call all shown everywhere, Dai's, Tomi's and RAW RBN
csv, but percentages remain low to negligible, IMHO. I mean that not all
the mismatched strings call had seen in every place. This leave space
for any further speculation. As VE7CC wrote here, as example.
So, my rant went quite illegitimate as numbers, 32/4717 or 96/4717,
speak more favorably than what I'd think-tanked alone. Did you seen,
4717 record for Tomi's data and RAW RBN ... to have further conclusions
is up to anyone.
I believe that I have had more AGN AGN or AGE? AGE? than those show by
the ratio of right and wrong catches of the call I am eviscerating. This
looking tree data sources, one included in the others, plus of course
the memory of those wonderful 48 hours of the last JARTS that all, well
we 3, have had operation the call IW1QN @IQ1RY.
I could stigmatize even more than what I have done how IW1Q is a
remarkable error.
But IW1QNN and IW1UN aren't errors by rules. So theirs owners could pop
up anytime from the dark.
That's is pretty right for IW1QNN, as this call is in the same series of
IW1QN. Not so for IW1UN, that
to my knowledge was never assigned, but still it's a viable call to be
seen on air.
That's will not as easy as it it is to discriminate as the case as a
friend like IW1AU will come in RTTY ...
Anyway just looking, I'd not deeply analyzed the whole set of calls
furnished here by anyone, it seems that there are more higher error rate
for other calls. But then my knowledge of other nations call creation is
really limited.
Then we have to remember that propagation and other setup & working
conditions plays theirs respective roles.
Anyway as Dai san data and more the worldwide data presented by Tomi
shows very low error rate I have to ask my excuses to anyone as to have
used the bandwidth here for an improper rant. Sorry.
May I say that I was catches by the easiest profiling of numbers don't
looking at the whole thing. That's maybe my fault.
Well, I lose another good silence moment. :-(
73 de iw1ayd Salvo
PS More, this time, differently than in January, February and the VOLTA,
I haven't seen the call I was operating mismatched on the bandmap of my
beloved N1MM+. This would confirm, at least to me, that things are going
to be better and better since then. I was on VE7CC cluster by a common
operators decision for the whole JARTS. :-)
On 21/10/2015 18:00, rtty-request@contesting.com wrote:
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 13:30:27 +0900
From: Dai NAGAKURA<ndai@cameo.plala.or.jp>
To:rtty@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] JARTS RBN stats (Tomi kallio)
Message-ID:<20151021130954.17AC.272C9EF@cameo.plala.or.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
de JF2IWL Good morning
Here is analysis of my RTTY skimer server on JATRS by SH5 analyzer.
http://59925.org/sh5/jf2iwl/2015/2015_jarts_ww_rtty_jf2iwl_skimmer/
8783 stations in 48h may be little fewer than Tomi's result.
In 1,189 unique callsigns,
http://59925.org/sh5/jf2iwl/2015/2015_jarts_ww_rtty_jf2iwl_skimmer/allcallsigns.htm
Over half stations should be busted or "Caller's Callsign"
, on White and Blue belt (once or twice captured) may be these.
Of course I undesrtand RTTY SkimServ cannot avoid capture caller's call.
and Busted
Pse excuse me Salvo,
I captured you as IW1UN ,IW1QNN etc.
I did not use Master.dta to catch all station.
Dai JF2IWL
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|