Normalized to: Antonenko, I.
[1]
oai:arXiv.org:1404.1334 [pdf] - 806396
The variability of crater identification among expert and community
crater analysts
Robbins, Stuart J.;
Antonenko, Irene;
Kirchoff, Michelle R.;
Chapman, Clark R.;
Fassett, Caleb I.;
Herrick, Robert R.;
Singer, Kelsi;
Zanetti, Michael;
Lehan, Cory;
Huang, Di;
Gay, Pamela L.
Submitted: 2014-03-13
The identification of impact craters on planetary surfaces provides important
information about their geological history. Most studies have relied on
individual analysts who map and identify craters and interpret crater
statistics. However, little work has been done to determine how the counts vary
as a function of technique, terrain, or between researchers. Furthermore,
several novel internet-based projects ask volunteers with little to no training
to identify craters, and it was unclear how their results compare against the
typical professional researcher. To better understand the variation among
experts and to compare with volunteers, eight professional researchers have
identified impact features in two separate regions of the moon. Small craters
(diameters ranging from 10 m to 500 m) were measured on a lunar mare region and
larger craters (100s m to a few km in diameter) were measured on both lunar
highlands and maria. Volunteer data were collected for the small craters on the
mare. Our comparison shows that the level of agreement among experts depends on
crater diameter, number of craters per diameter bin, and terrain type, with
differences of up to $\sim\pm45%$. We also found artifacts near the minimum
crater diameter that was studied. These results indicate that caution must be
used in most cases when interpreting small variations in crater size-frequency
distributions and for craters $\le10$ pixels across. Because of the natural
variability found, projects that emphasize many people identifying craters on
the same area and using a consensus result are likely to yield the most
consistent and robust information.