Hi Bill,

 

Agreed. Just one clarification: I didn’t want to let all /R decoded be 
discarded unless in a special operation activity mode, ONLY THE AP DECODES OF 
/R CALLSIGNS, so that true /R callsigns are still displayed when in normal FT8 
mode. The idea is to filter out some more false decodes in a clever way.

 

73 de Uwe, DG2YCB 

 

Von: Bill Somerville [mailto:[email protected]] 
Gesendet: Montag, 25. Mai 2020 14:23
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.2.0-rc2 False Decode

 

Hi Uwe,

 

that is a possible option but we must be careful. For example a user being 
deprived of sight of messages that happened to contain '/R' suffixes may 
misunderstand that they should be enabling the relevant contest mode. Also the 
same argument would apply to '/P' suffixes, would you be happy to have all 
messages from '/P' stations hidden? As I said to Steve, we must be careful not 
to program in use of information not received on air, after all we are dealing 
with radio communications - not sanitizing decoded messages based on outside 
information. IMHO it is better for the operator to understand some of the 
underlying technology and to apply informed decision making to comprehend what 
is displayed. After all the consequences of trying to communicate with an 
invalid station whose callsign was printed in a false decode is not serious, 
maybe some embarrassment and a little wasted time.

 

73
Bill
G4WJS.

 

On 25/05/2020 13:10, DG2YCB, Uwe wrote:

Bill,
Just an idea: Wouldn't it make sense to discard all the /R ?a2 decodes
unless a special operation mode is set?. My observation also with the prior
WSJT-X versions was, that if there are false decodes, most often they are /R
decodes. Couldn't that significantly reduce rate of false decodes without
reducing the sensitivity? And when only the AP decodes were discarded, a
true /R call would still be decoded. Couldn't that be a solution? 
 
73 de Uwe, DG2YCB
____________________________________
German Amateur Radio Station DG2YCB
Dr. Uwe Risse
eMail: [email protected]
Info: www.qrz.com/db/DG2YCB
 
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Bill Somerville [mailto:[email protected]] 
Gesendet: Montag, 25. Mai 2020 13:43
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.2.0-rc2 False Decode
 
On 25/05/2020 12:04, Stephen VK3SIR wrote:

Folks,
 
I just picked  up a false decode that can be replicated when played back

through WSJT-X 2.2.0 rc2:

104945 -23 -0.5 1623 ~  VK3VM FH9ZZV/R ND49                 ? a2
 
Research suggests this is not a genuine call and is definitely a false

decode (i.e. ND49 = middle of Southern Ocean). I have noted that many false
decodes in the previous version are reported with /R !

As one cannot send attachments via email I'll reforward this email plus

the .wav file directly to Bill and Joe for further analysis.

73
 
Steve I
VK3VM / VK3SIR

Steve,
 
AP decodes flagged as low confidence ('?' marker) should always be 
considered dubious, and unless there is other evidence that the decode 
is genuine it should be ignored. Without using knowledge not obtained on 
air it is virtually impossible for the decoder to eliminate such false 
decodes without damaging the capabilities of the AP decoding mechanism. 
AP decodes of the 'a2' category are only detected shortly after a CQ 
call IIRC.
 
The FT8, FT4, and MSK144 decoders give virtually every possible message 
equal weight. The message types that allow a '/P' or '/R' (grid rover 
station) prefix to a standard callsign have a 50% probability per 
possible callsign that random data will unpack as one of those prefixes, 
so they will be far more common in false decodes than in genuine 
messages where the expected likelihood is far lower.
 
73
Bill
G4WJS.

 

_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Reply via email to