Elite Observatory - Search your journal for potentially interesting objects, or notify you of new ones on the fly while exploring!

[Baxder]

I forgot how involved this can be...Here's an analysis of the two criteria with my log data. The Criteria that checks for wide rings shows a significant reduction in false positives of offset ring orbits around ringed stars if the wide ring vs. asteroid belts theory is sound. For some reason, I find it interesting that neither criteria detected a body orbiting a wide-ringed star that the other did not.

I need to figure out how to add a check for wide B rings to the criteria.

Spoiler: This isn't working; just detects "A" Rings

<Criteria Comparator="And">
    <Criteria Comparator="Or">
<!-- Parent is ringed planet... -->
        <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
            <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Rings</FirstValue>
                <SecondValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Planet</SecondValue>       
            </Operation>
        </Criteria>
<!-- Or a wide-ringed star... -->
        <Criteria Comparator="And">
            <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
                <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                    <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Rings</FirstValue>
                    <SecondValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Star</SecondValue>       
                </Operation>
            </Criteria>
            <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="5">
                <Operation Operator="Divide">
                    <FirstValue Type="Operation">
                        <Operation Operator="Subtract">
                            <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:1:OuterRad</FirstValue>
                            <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:1:InnerRad</SecondValue>       
                        </Operation>
                    </FirstValue>
                    <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Radius</SecondValue>
                </Operation>
            </Criteria>
        </Criteria>
    <!-- This is the part that isn't working; checking for a wide B Ring around a star -->
        <Criteria Comparator="And">
            <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
                <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                    <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Rings</FirstValue>
                    <SecondValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Star</SecondValue>       
                </Operation>
            </Criteria>
            <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="5">
                <Operation Operator="Divide">
                    <FirstValue Type="Operation">
                        <Operation Operator="Subtract">
                            <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:OuterRad</FirstValue>
                            <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:InnerRad</SecondValue>       
                        </Operation>
                    </FirstValue>
                    <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Radius</SecondValue>
                </Operation>
            </Criteria>
        </Criteria>
    </Criteria>
<!-- High inclination check -->
    <Criteria Comparator="Or">
       <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="10.0">
             <Operation Operator="None">
                  <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
             </Operation>
       </Criteria>
       <Criteria Comparator="Less" Value="-10.0">
             <Operation Operator="None">
                  <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
             </Operation>
       </Criteria>
    </Criteria>
    <Description>Offset Ring Orbit 2</Description>
    <Detail>
        <Item>Parent:PlanetClass</Item>
        <Item>DistanceFromArrivalLS</Item>
    </Detail>
</Criteria>

 

[Baxder]

I tried just checking for offset orbits around stars with wide B rings, and it did manage to find the ones initially missing, but also managed to find 42 more without wide rings. So to include that in the criteria would kinda offset the gains. Looks like a dead end.

Spoiler: XML

<Criteria Comparator="And">
            <Criteria Comparator="And">
                <Criteria Comparator="Equal" Value="2">
                    <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                        <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:Count</FirstValue>
                        <SecondValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Star</SecondValue>        
                    </Operation>
                </Criteria>
                <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="5">
                    <Operation Operator="Divide">
                        <FirstValue Type="Operation">
                            <Operation Operator="Subtract">
                                <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:OuterRad</FirstValue>
                                <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:InnerRad</SecondValue>        
                            </Operation>
                        </FirstValue>
                        <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Radius</SecondValue>
                    </Operation>
                </Criteria>
            </Criteria>
    <Criteria Comparator="Or">
       <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="10.0">
             <Operation Operator="None">
                  <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
             </Operation>
       </Criteria>
       <Criteria Comparator="Less" Value="-10.0">
             <Operation Operator="None">
                  <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
             </Operation>
       </Criteria>
    </Criteria>
    <Description>Offset Ring Orbit 2</Description>
    <Detail>
        <Item>Parent:PlanetClass</Item>
        <Item>DistanceFromArrivalLS</Item>
    </Detail>
</Criteria>

 

[Martin Shepard]

I tried just checking for offset orbits around stars with wide B rings, and it did manage to find the ones initially missing, but also managed to find 42 more without wide rings. So to include that in the criteria would kinda offset the gains. Looks like a dead end.

Spoiler: XML

<Criteria Comparator="And">
            <Criteria Comparator="And">
                <Criteria Comparator="Equal" Value="2">
                    <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                        <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:Count</FirstValue>
                        <SecondValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Star</SecondValue>        
                    </Operation>
                </Criteria>
                <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="5">
                    <Operation Operator="Divide">
                        <FirstValue Type="Operation">
                            <Operation Operator="Subtract">
                                <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:OuterRad</FirstValue>
                                <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:InnerRad</SecondValue>        
                            </Operation>
                        </FirstValue>
                        <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Radius</SecondValue>
                    </Operation>
                </Criteria>
            </Criteria>
    <Criteria Comparator="Or">
       <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="10.0">
             <Operation Operator="None">
                  <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
             </Operation>
       </Criteria>
       <Criteria Comparator="Less" Value="-10.0">
             <Operation Operator="None">
                  <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
             </Operation>
       </Criteria>
    </Criteria>
    <Description>Offset Ring Orbit 2</Description>
    <Detail>
        <Item>Parent:PlanetClass</Item>
        <Item>DistanceFromArrivalLS</Item>
    </Detail>
</Criteria>

Thanks for your effort in trying to figure out some interesting critieria

 

[Baxder]

I can't try it now, but Here's another approach.

Spoiler: Reformulated

<Criteria Comparator="And">
    <Criteria Comparator="Or">
        <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
            <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Rings</FirstValue>
                <SecondValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Planet</SecondValue>
            </Operation>
        </Criteria>
        <Criteria Comparator="And">
            <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
                <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                    <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:DistanceFromArrivalLS</FirstValue>
                    <SecondValue Type="Operation">
                        <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                            <FirstValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Star</FirstValue>
                            <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Rings</SecondValue>
                        </Operation>
                    </SecondValue>
                </Operation>
            </Criteria>
            <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="5">
                <Operation Operator="Divide">
                    <FirstValue Type="Operation">
                        <Operation Operator="Add">
                            <FirstValue Type="Operation">
                                <Operation Operator="Subtract">
                                    <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:1:OuterRad</FirstValue>
                                    <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:1:InnerRad</SecondValue>
                                </Operation>
                            </FirstValue>
                            <SecondValue Type="Operation">
                                <Operation Operator="Subtract">
                                    <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:OuterRad</FirstValue>
                                    <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:InnerRad</SecondValue>
                                </Operation>
                            </SecondValue>
                        </Operation>
                    </FirstValue>
                    <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Radius</SecondValue>
                </Operation>
            </Criteria>
        </Criteria>
    </Criteria>
    <Criteria Comparator="Or">
        <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="10.0">
            <Operation Operator="None">
                <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
            </Operation>
        </Criteria>
        <Criteria Comparator="Less" Value="-10.0">
            <Operation Operator="None">
                <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
            </Operation>
        </Criteria>
    </Criteria>
<Description>Offset Ring Orbit 2</Description>
<Detail>
    <Item>Parent:PlanetClass</Item>
    <Item>DistanceFromArrivalLS</Item>
</Detail>
</Criteria>

 

[Baxder]

Tried it, fixed it, and now getting an error: Object Reference Not Set to an Instance of an Object...? Is that because it uses Ring:2 where there is none?

 

[Vithigar]

Your outermost element is an "and" comparator with only one criteria in it.

 

[Baxder]

Oooookay...The Inclination check should be the second. Have I misplaced a </Criteria> or two? I get lost in all that.

EDIT: I think I see it. I need to move the one before the description to above the inclination check, ya?

 

[Vithigar]

Yes, I think that's it. You've got three criteria inside your first "or" element.

Personal recommendation: Get something that can beautify/pretty-print/auto-indent xml when working on anything heavily nested to make what's inside what more easily visible. Ideally also with collapsible nodes. I use Notepad++ with the XML Tools plugin.

 

[Baxder]

Wow, yeah that helps!

^ Updated

 

[Baxder]

That's...interesting. It detected all the "B" rings, the same "shared" successes, and had only the two "shared" failures of the B-Ring only check...and that's all. 21 total detections. I feel like this is a solid step in the right direction, if not too far.

[About an hour later:] Eureka! Lessons learned and best practices have merged to form an Offset Ring Orbit criteria with a 90% success rate of identifying bodies orbiting wide-ringed stars! That's more than twice the original!

Spoiler: Huzzah!

<Criteria Comparator="And">
    <Criteria Comparator="Or">
        <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
            <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Rings</FirstValue>
                <SecondValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Planet</SecondValue>   
            </Operation>
        </Criteria>
        <Criteria Comparator="Or">
            <Criteria Comparator="And">
                <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
                    <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                        <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:DistanceFromArrivalLS</FirstValue>
                        <SecondValue Type="Operation">
                            <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                                <FirstValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Star</FirstValue>
                                <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Rings</SecondValue>
                            </Operation>
                        </SecondValue>
                    </Operation>
                </Criteria>
                <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="5">
                    <Operation Operator="Divide">
                        <FirstValue Type="Operation">
                            <Operation Operator="Subtract">
                                <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:1:OuterRad</FirstValue>
                                <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:1:InnerRad</SecondValue>   
                            </Operation>
                        </FirstValue>
                        <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Radius</SecondValue>
                    </Operation>
                </Criteria>
            </Criteria>
            <Criteria Comparator="And">
                <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
                    <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                        <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:DistanceFromArrivalLS</FirstValue>
                        <SecondValue Type="Operation">
                            <Operation Operator="Multiply">
                                <FirstValue Type="EventData">ParentType:1:Star</FirstValue>
                                <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Rings</SecondValue>
                            </Operation>
                        </SecondValue>
                    </Operation>
                </Criteria>
                <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="5">
                    <Operation Operator="Divide">
                        <FirstValue Type="Operation">
                            <Operation Operator="Subtract">
                                <FirstValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:OuterRad</FirstValue>
                                <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Ring:2:InnerRad</SecondValue>   
                            </Operation>
                        </FirstValue>
                        <SecondValue Type="EventData">Parent:Radius</SecondValue>
                    </Operation>
                </Criteria>
            </Criteria>
        </Criteria>
    </Criteria>
    <Criteria Comparator="Or">
       <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="10.0">
             <Operation Operator="None">
                  <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
             </Operation>
       </Criteria>
       <Criteria Comparator="Less" Value="-10.0">
             <Operation Operator="None">
                  <FirstValue Type="EventData">OrbitalInclination</FirstValue>
             </Operation>
       </Criteria>
    </Criteria>
    <Description>Offset Ring Orbit 2</Description>
    <Detail>
        <Item>Parent:PlanetClass</Item>
        <Item>DistanceFromArrivalLS</Item>
    </Detail>
</Criteria>

Next will be to tackle a reasonable Semi-Major Axis:Ring Width ratio for ring visibility...usually anything past a "c" body isn't worth the effort.

 

[Maelstrom5K]

Hey guys,

first a big thanks to everyone involved.
Though I dunno what to appreciate more, the work on Elite Observatory itself, the cringe XML math, or the knowledge geo/bio signal scans are frame tied (yes, I did facepalm as I read that).

I stumbled actoss a minor issue with the custom "Undiscovered System" criteria. It triggers on a Nav Beacon scan in pre-discovered systems. No idea how to avoid that...

Look at me, the great explorer, I found Sol.
I've included Sirius, because I am sure that was my first NB scan in Sirius. I remember I did that because EDDiscovery showed Sirius empty (Sirius A/B unknown) except for Sirius A1/B1 that I had mapped before the scan.

@Vithigar:
I just had a feature idea: Could you please implement a tooltip (like with "Read on launch") for the standard interest criteria checkboxes showing the cutoff/requirements, to make it easier for new users to select criteria or use their own adjusted ones?
Landable & Terraformable is obvious. But how high has the g to be on a landable high g? How large ist a landable large?

 

[Vithigar]

Undiscovered Sol is kind of hilarious. Like you said though, not sure there's a good fix in the current custom criteria, but hopefully the new system in the next version will be able to handle it better.

The specifics of built-in criteria is something that has been mentioned before as well, and I'm planning to incorporate that into the rewrite.

For now though, here you go!

Landable high gravity	Surface gravity >3g
Landable large	Radius >18000km
Wide ring	Ring outer radius - ring inner radius > 5x planet radius
Close orbit	Semi-major axis < 3x parent body radius
Close ring proximity	Separation between body and ring < 10x body radius
Close binary	Body radius > 0.4x semi-major axis
Tiny object	Radius <300km
Fast rotation	Rotation period <8 hours and not tidal locked
Fast orbit	Orbital period <8 hours
High eccentricity	>0.9

 

[Maelstrom5K]

Thanks, maybe pin those infos somewhere in first post as a reference for now? Reading through 43 pages is kinda meh.

In the meantime, I checked the EDSM records Observatory File, and some records are out of date - so here is an updated one.

There were some issues though:

• The EDSM record site does not show "Largest Planet" and "Hottest Planet" anymore. I did only compare against the site, not the raw data, so I couldn't update those values. If I recall correctly, those were displayed on EDSM in the past, like "Bigger, Smaller, Hotter, Colder"? Does anyone know why they are gone?
• Water Worlds and Water Giants were completely missing (now included). Without hottest/largest though due to the first issue.
• Helium Giants were completely missing (now included). I even manually looked up the hottest and largest ones. But if you miss out on those, you've propably landed on Raxxla and didn't notice as well... I couldn't check the spelling im my journal though as I haven't visited them yet. I assumed <FirstValue Type="EventData">PlanetClass:Helium gas giant</FirstValue> is correct.
• Mismatch between the coldest Ammonia World on the EDSM site (100 K) and the old code (14 K). I assumed 100 K as correct.
• The old code has no lower temperature check for Icy Bodies and Sudarsky Class I Giants, as a 0K body is known. EDSM states 1K for both. Left as is, because propably a rounding issue?
• Here was a mismatch between the compared value and the Description. I assumed 3777K as the right one (couldn't check due to first issue).

    <Criteria Comparator="And">
        <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="3777.0">
            <Operation Operator="None">
                <FirstValue Type="EventData">SurfaceTemperature</FirstValue>
            </Operation>
        </Criteria>
        <Criteria Comparator="Greater" Value="0">
            <Operation Operator="None">
                <FirstValue Type="EventData">PlanetClass:Icy body</FirstValue>
            </Operation>
        </Criteria>
        <Description>Record breaker: Surface Tempature greater than 6449 K and Icy body</Description>
        <Detail>
            <Item>SurfaceTemperature</Item>
        </Detail>
    </Criteria>

 

[Maelstrom5K]

Hey Vithigar,
could you add EventData "StarType" for custom criteria, as with "PlanetClass"?

It was impossible for me to make a check for "StarType" in v0.5.20.153. Or am I missing something?

 

[Vithigar]

Hey Vithigar,
could you add EventData "StarType" for custom criteria, as with "PlanetClass"?

It was impossible for me to make a check for "StarType" in v0.5.20.153. Or am I missing something?

Huh, you're correct, it's not one of the values you can check. Completely an oversight on my part, and you're the first person to ever mention it.

Adding it would be a small change. I might quickly add it and release a small update within the next week or so.

 

[Vithigar]

Done. Small update to make StarType available in custom criteria:

Release Star Types! · Xjph/EliteObservatory

This is a tiny update to add StarType to the available values for custom criteria. It is used in the same manner as the PlanetClass value, where you look for a match to a specified type using the v...

github.com

 

[JudeSaint]

Few questions. Ive been using this for a while and i love it! Is there a readme somewhere or some post that explains what the symbols are or what the meaning of certain things are? ... Like for example the little circle with lines through it on some planets. Or "nested moon" ... what does it mean?

And next question is. If i have everything checked is that EVERYTHING? ... or are there other custom criteria that i would have to add in to get certain things? ... i like seeing everything

 

[Vithigar]

Few questions. Ive been using this for a while and i love it! Is there a readme somewhere or some post that explains what the symbols are or what the meaning of certain things are? ... Like for example the little circle with lines through it on some planets. Or "nested moon" ... what does it mean?
View attachment 206298
And next question is. If i have everything checked is that EVERYTHING? ... or are there other custom criteria that i would have to add in to get certain things? ... i like seeing everything

The only readme is for custom criteria at the moment. The round symbol is an indicator that the body can be landed on. A nested moon is a moon of a moon.

As for finding "everything", no checking all the boxes won't find everything that might be interesting just because that's a fairly subjective requirement. If there are things not included that you might find interesting then yes, you can add them with custom criteria.

 

[JudeSaint]

The only readme is for custom criteria at the moment. The round symbol is an indicator that the body can be landed on. A nested moon is a moon of a moon.

As for finding "everything", no checking all the boxes won't find everything that might be interesting just because that's a fairly subjective requirement. If there are things not included that you might find interesting then yes, you can add them with custom criteria.

Im not so good at the whole custom stuff haha. I guess ... what would be considered interesting that is not already in the preset criteria?

 

[Vithigar]

Im not so good at the whole custom stuff haha. I guess ... what would be considered interesting that is not already in the preset criteria?

That is a very broad and open question. What you find interesting and would like to look for isn't really a question I can answer for you. That said, this post has several xml snippets for custom criteria for things like moons with orbits inclined above rings to get better views, record setting bodies, and very thin ring systems. You might be interested in some of those, or might find inspiration there for something else you might like to search for.