Yet Another Incorrect AI/ML Decision
Sunkast-PGO
Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
I nominated an artificial topiary in the shape of a tooth that was incorrectly rejected by AI/ML. Second time having this rejected now. First was by reviewers. I took new photos when I submitted this for the second time. Very disappointed that it just gets automatically rejected. And when you only get 1 appeal every 30 days, it feels like I am forced to use a very rare appeal on something that a machine incorrectly rejected.
Comments
Temporary display. Easy reject.
Actually correct AI decision.
If this truly is "Machine Learning" then there needs to be a way to teach it better, which would require user input. Active Wayfarers need to be able to request overrides readily. 1000+ Agreements + Great rating? Allow a review!
Refund Upgrades wasted!
No, this is not a temporary display. This is an artificial topiary, not a plant, and is on permanent display. Idk how I would vote on this without seeing the rest of the nomination, but I do feel reviewers should have been given a chance to see this nomination.
@Sunkast-PGO
Could you please post the rest of the nomination.
This looks like this a classic case of “too much green” which the ML or Emily as we have called it really doesn’t like. It also looks as though it is next to cemetery. I presume the dentist is just outside of the cemetery area, but there have also been problems recently with Emily being over sensitive to potentially sensitive locations.
I can also confirm the AI doesn’t like “too much brown”. I recently had a nomination of a scenic lookout in a local park rejected.
The first submission was rejected for temp and natural feature. I intentionally waited a couple months for the end of fall to take new photos so that it would hopefully be more obvious that it was not a natural feature. I also tried to get an angle for the main photo that showed the base of the topiary to point out that is not natural, and is permanent. The support photo I took at an angle that included the dentist office. I guess none of the effort I made to address the initial rejections mattered since it was rejected automatically by AI/ML.
I genuinely feel like submitting this again would be futile as a result of my experience with AI/ML. I have many other noms I would rather use an appeal on than this one merely to help the machine learn. I know I am not the only one that feels this way. I am all for helping to improve the machine. But not at the expense of the limited number of appeals I can make. Perhaps if there was some other way to submit incorrectly rejected AI/ML noms for it to learn from, that would be preferable.
Thanks.
It’s a tough one. Normally I would suggest trying to close crop on the tooth, but as it’s designed to mimic real life I’m no convinced it would work unless it has a dusting of snow 🤔
I think it’s confusing to use topiary in the title. My reaction was so this is topiary and not until I read further do I start to understand it is a model or sculpture (not sure what would be best word) . I wouldn’t be surprised if the word topiary was part of the reasons for rejection. So I would suggest a title change and maybe review how it’s coming across in the text. It is meant to be fun - going to the dentist is fun??? so maybe inject some of that fun into the description. Give it another go.
If it's not a plant, what is it made of?
I'd call it a Fauxpiary to avoid confusion. :)
I might call it a sculpture designed in the style of a topiary.
Here is another that AI/ML completely whiffed on. Identifying info has been censored in the screenshot.
Oh I like that…quite clever.
Thats a pity it didn’t get passed Emily