Suggestion: Frontier and Elite players can do real science while having fun playing Elite Dangerous.

[T_Horrocks]

It's been a short while since TESS (Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite) started gathering data which is available as Planet Hunters TESS.
So why not use it in Elite Dangerous? Let me explain how:

Game side:
Ingame description:
Did you ever want to push your FSD further than before? You can now use the spacetime distortion scanner constructed by Alex Mayor (new engineer?) to optimize your FSD drive and tune it to the ripples of spacetime along the jump. You must first painstainkingly scan ahead and map the distortions along your planned jump vector. This increases the FSD efficiency and allows a one-time extention of your jump range by additional 10ly.

Interface explained:
The Galaxy Map now includes an additional option "Use SDS scans" to plot a route. Before each jump "you must tune your FSD before the jump. Use your Spacetime Distortion Scanner". You can open a new view mode similar in style to the FSS window. There, a plot appears showing a curve that player must check for sudden dips. If present, these must be highlighted with a rectangle. Then, the player confirms the selections across the curve in the "input distortion coordinates into the FSD: <number of rectangles> distortions found" field pressing the "confirm" button. If player can find no dips "input distortion coordinates into the FSD: no distortions detected" is displayed which player "confirms" with the button.
The navigational computer confirms this with the message "FSD efficiency increased" and allows the extended jump but only towards the scanned star. If after scanning, the player changes the target, the jump range is NOT extended but returning to the previous target still allows for the extended jump. After the successful jump the SDS memory is wiped and if the same route is selected later, a player must repeat the procedure.

Where's the science in this?
General idea:
Current astronomical observations produce more data then ever. The amount is so large that there's not enough scientists to analyze it all. Hence the idea of citizen science.
The collected data is made available to volunteers who don't need to be scientists, but equipped with very simple tools they can make a prelimiary data selection or analysis. This reduces the amount of data that must be processed by scientists.

In reality, the curve described above is an observed lightcurve of a distant star observed by the TESS sattelite. The dips are transiting objects and these happen only rarely. The data can be accessed by anyone who registers with the planet hunters project. The data is presented in a very simple web interface. The same piece of data is cleverly presented to a number of people which allows for a statistical analysis of possible finds. More information about the actual process is available out there.

If enough people points toward the same piece of data, it is then sent to a scientist who does additional analysis of the data and decides if it is a real find or an error (or something else).

Implementation:
The game servers should be able to easily access the data and present it to players if the SDS is opened. The results of the in-game operations are then sent back to the data servers much like in case of web users results.
It obviously requires permission and cooperation of the scientists behind the data but they should be happy to increase the user base of the project. At the same time Frontier would be the first to create a game that does the actual science.

I would be happy to help or provide more information if needed.

Conclusion:
Elite Dangerous is already pretty well based in science. If it could also contribute to scientific discovery it would truly be AWESOME!

 

[RolloTreadway]

It's an interesting idea, but I see a glaring problem with it.

The Elite galaxy is already fully formed, stars and planets and moons already generated. Sometimes, a new real-world discovery will be added into the galaxy. But this has to be done manually, it requires work (and other things are often a priority), and it's also dependent on the change not affecting anything that already exists - in other words, it has to be an undiscovered system which won't have any knock-on effects on future storylines or discoveries. Consequently, much real-world science doesn't make it into Elite. 99.9999% of systems in the game, though they conform with a lot of actual scientific understanding of how the galaxy develops, are wholly fictional. They can't be replaced en masse as new real-world discoveries come along.

Ultimately, we can't use a fictional galaxy for real science.

 

[dm06]

TESS owners should start their own game with their own galaxy. For pure explorers.

 

[John Guevara]

i had same idea about a real science as minigame: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...exploration-scanning-multicrew-mining.301121/
there are many more projects which can be included as minigame, biology, astrophysics, geology, climate, and so on..., here e.g. for space: https://www.zooniverse.org/projects?discipline=astronomy&page=1&status=live

 

[T_Horrocks]

It's an interesting idea, but I see a glaring problem with it.

The Elite galaxy is already fully formed, stars and planets and moons already generated. Sometimes, a new real-world discovery will be added into the galaxy. But this has to be done manually, it requires work (and other things are often a priority), and it's also dependent on the change not affecting anything that already exists - in other words, it has to be an undiscovered system which won't have any knock-on effects on future storylines or discoveries. Consequently, much real-world science doesn't make it into Elite. 99.9999% of systems in the game, though they conform with a lot of actual scientific understanding of how the galaxy develops, are wholly fictional. They can't be replaced en masse as new real-world discoveries come along.

Ultimately, we can't use a fictional galaxy for real science.

Of course, you are correct.

However, this is not the core of the idea. The main thing is to use player's ability to recognize shapes (which human brain does still much better than any machine learning algorithms) to work with "raw" data whatever it may represent.
In fact, the true data is a lightcurve of a star observed by the TESS.
Within the game it would be interpreted as the distortions of the spacetime along the jump vector.
So something different entirely.

However, this is not really important. The important thing is that real science gets the additional manpower for another form of citizen science while a player gets the benefit of an extended jump. At the same time the company - Frontier Development - gets 1. fame for creating the first game to do actual science, 2. can obtain funding for scientific projects and outreach especially if partnered with the scientific team behind Planet Hunters. Everybody wins.

Of course, this can be optional. You can opt in or out of this mechanics. It changes little in game.


I'm not saying it is easy and straightforward. It's not something ready to be implemented with one click. There would have to be real manpower invested into making this work both on the FD side and on the Planet Hunters side. In my opinion, however, it may be worth it.

 

[John Guevara]

It's an interesting idea, but I see a glaring problem with it.

The Elite galaxy is already fully formed, stars and planets and moons already generated. Sometimes, a new real-world discovery will be added into the galaxy. But this has to be done manually, it requires work (and other things are often a priority), and it's also dependent on the change not affecting anything that already exists - in other words, it has to be an undiscovered system which won't have any knock-on effects on future storylines or discoveries. Consequently, much real-world science doesn't make it into Elite. 99.9999% of systems in the game, though they conform with a lot of actual scientific understanding of how the galaxy develops, are wholly fictional. They can't be replaced en masse as new real-world discoveries come along.

Ultimately, we can't use a fictional galaxy for real science.

you don't need to explore existing systems in our fictional galaxy, we can do much more things, like analyze biology life on new/existings landable rocks at moons or chemistry reactions in gas giant atmospheres... currently we explored less then 1% of the whole galaxy, we can find much more new things which can be explored as minigame and help real science...

 

[RolloTreadway]

Of course, you are correct.

However, this is not the core of the idea. The main thing is to use player's ability to recognize shapes (which human brain does still much better than any machine learning algorithms) to work with "raw" data whatever it may represent.
In fact, the true data is a lightcurve of a star observed by the TESS.
Within the game it would be interpreted as the distortions of the spacetime along the jump vector.
So something different entirely.

However, this is not really important. The important thing is that real science gets the additional manpower for another form of citizen science while a player gets the benefit of an extended jump. At the same time the company - Frontier Development - gets 1. fame for creating the first game to do actual science, 2. can obtain funding for scientific projects and outreach especially if partnered with the scientific team behind Planet Hunters. Everybody wins.

Of course, this can be optional. You can opt in or out of this mechanics. It changes little in game.


I'm not saying it is easy and straightforward. It's not something ready to be implemented with one click. There would have to be real manpower invested into making this work both on the FD side and on the Planet Hunters side. In my opinion, however, it may be worth it.

It would take an awful lot of manpower, because for every dip in the curve, the devs will have had to place an object into the game. In which case, the devs will have already done the citizen science work and we'd just be copying their findings. I can't see FD wanting to pay their staff to do voluntary citizen science work, because that's bad business for them, and also defeats the object of citizen science.

There's just no way to add content to a game without it being someone's paid job to add that content.

you don't need to explore existing systems in our fictional galaxy, we can do much more things, like analyze biology life on new/existings landable rocks at moons or chemistry reactions in gas giant atmospheres... currently we explored less then 1% of the whole galaxy, we can find much more new things which can be explored as minigame and help real science...

But if we're exploring as a minigame in Elite, we're exploring the fictional Elite galaxy. It is not the real galaxy. Its planets and moons are, save for a tiny proportion that have been added manually, not real. There is no way to match the fictional Elite galaxy to the real galaxy that is being discovered in the planet hunter project, other than by paying devs to do the planet hunting work and add the discoveries manually. Nobody is going to pay for that.

 

[T_Horrocks]

It would take an awful lot of manpower, because for every dip in the curve, the devs will have had to place an object into the game. In which case, the devs will have already done the citizen science work and we'd just be copying their findings. I can't see FD wanting to pay their staff to do voluntary citizen science work, because that's bad business for them, and also defeats the object of citizen science.

There's just no way to add content to a game without it being someone's paid job to add that content.

That is only one way to implement this and, of course, you are correct, this way would be pointless and this is not what I'm suggesting.

This is not how this project works.
The same piece of data is presented to a given number of users. Assuming most of them does this carefully, each one of them should get similar results. If there are people who by carelessness or deliberately want to give a different result, they will return radically different results. Thus by clever statistics you rule out extreme results and only get the average which by statistics is correct. If this yields an interesting piece of data, a real scientist looks at it again, more thoroughly.

Similar if not the same algorithm can be implemented here. It's already being used so there's nothing radical to change. No need for the devs to do it themselves first. Only clever and tested statistics.

But if we're exploring as a minigame in Elite, we're exploring the fictional Elite galaxy. It is not the real galaxy. Its planets and moons are, save for a tiny proportion that have been added manually, not real. There is no way to match the fictional Elite galaxy to the real galaxy that is being discovered in the planet hunter project, other than by paying devs to do the planet hunting work and add the discoveries manually. Nobody is going to pay for that.

You cannot discover new things in a galaxy that was constructed based on already discovered knowledge. This is obvious.
Nobody suggests changes to the Elite Galaxy, either. It's great as it is. We only suggest implementing well known tools and ideas that could actually be useful to science.

Another example: while mapping previously unmapped moon in Elite Dangerous you start a minigame which presents you with very narrow and detailed images from Mars and lets you mark the polygonal ridges (see Planet Four project). Again, clever statistics is used to eliminate wrong results.
As a reward a small hotspot of rare materials is spawned where you scanned it.
For your time and effort you are presented with a small reward. You don't have to do it, nothing really depends on it but if you do, you help real science.


I am an astronomer so I present the projects which I understand best but the same principle is used in all the fields @John Guevara mentioned.

 

[T_Horrocks]

Why should Frontier Developments care?
1. Because there are many government programs that can give money to a private company which partners with the government scientific institution with science outreach initiatives.
2. Because usually discoveries done in Citizen Science are credited to the users (and in this case Frontier).
3. Because they become part of the scientific progress with little or no cost of their own.
4. Because there are players who would be happy to actually do science properly in Elite for a chance to add their name to a scientific discovery.

so potentially: money, fame, more players - this is what Frontier Developments could gain by doing this.

 

[John Guevara]

It would take an awful lot of manpower, because for every dip in the curve, the devs will have had to place an object into the game. In which case, the devs will have already done the citizen science work and we'd just be copying their findings. I can't see FD wanting to pay their staff to do voluntary citizen science work, because that's bad business for them, and also defeats the object of citizen science.

There's just no way to add content to a game without it being someone's paid job to add that content.



But if we're exploring as a minigame in Elite, we're exploring the fictional Elite galaxy. It is not the real galaxy. Its planets and moons are, save for a tiny proportion that have been added manually, not real. There is no way to match the fictional Elite galaxy to the real galaxy that is being discovered in the planet hunter project, other than by paying devs to do the planet hunting work and add the discoveries manually. Nobody is going to pay for that.

in most science projects there are already working API with frontends, there just need to implement this API in game.

 

[RolloTreadway]

That is only one way to implement this and, of course, you are correct, this way would be pointless and this is not what I'm suggesting.

This is not how this project works.
The same piece of data is presented to a given number of users. Assuming most of them does this carefully, each one of them should get similar results. If there are people who by carelessness or deliberately want to give a different result, they will return radically different results. Thus by clever statistics you rule out extreme results and only get the average which by statistics is correct. If this yields an interesting piece of data, a real scientist looks at it again, more thoroughly.

Similar if not the same algorithm can be implemented here. It's already being used so there's nothing radical to change. No need for the devs to do it themselves first. Only clever and tested statistics.




You cannot discover new things in a galaxy that was constructed based on already discovered knowledge. This is obvious.
Nobody suggests changes to the Elite Galaxy, either. It's great as it is. We only suggest implementing well known tools and ideas that could actually be useful to science.

Another example: while mapping previously unmapped moon in Elite Dangerous you start a minigame which presents you with very narrow and detailed images from Mars and lets you mark the polygonal ridges (see Planet Four project). Again, clever statistics is used to eliminate wrong results.
As a reward a small hotspot of rare materials is spawned where you scanned it.
For your time and effort you are presented with a small reward. You don't have to do it, nothing really depends on it but if you do, you help real science.


I am an astronomer so I present the projects which I understand best but the same principle is used in all the fields @John Guevara mentioned.

Okay, so you're not changing the galaxy, you're having people do work unrelated to Elite in exchange for rewards in Elite. I misunderstood your intention, and for that I apologise. But it's still not going to happen, at least not in that sense. FD are not going to give game-changing bonuses to people who have the time to spend doing citizen science as well as playing the game, because that's penalising players who are time poor (which is an awful lot of us). Maybe they could hook up with a project to give cosmetic rewards in exchange for contributions, but then, there's no reason for that to happen in game. Just do it from the project's website, maybe with an in game link, it'll produce the same data and require a lot less effort. Sign up to the project as an Elite player, do n amount of work and get a code for a decal. That could work.

Although I'd still say that it needs to be literally anything other than planet hunter, because then some troublemaking players will want to see the planets they identified in game. The Mars image checking (I've done a bit of that myself) would be less problematic.

in most science projects there are already working API with frontends, there just need to implement this API in game.

No, adding objects to the existing galaxy is not simply plugging a project's API in. It is massively more complex than that. I refer to the top half of this post: T_Horricks is right, it's not feasible to change the existing galaxy. Again, apologies if that isn't what you're asking for.

 

[T_Horrocks]

Okay, so you're not changing the galaxy, you're having people do work unrelated to Elite in exchange for rewards in Elite. I misunderstood your intention, and for that I apologise. But it's still not going to happen, at least not in that sense. FD are not going to give game-changing bonuses to people who have the time to spend doing citizen science as well as playing the game, because that's penalising players who are time poor (which is an awful lot of us). Maybe they could hook up with a project to give cosmetic rewards in exchange for contributions, but then, there's no reason for that to happen in game. Just do it from the project's website, maybe with an in game link, it'll produce the same data and require a lot less effort. Sign up to the project as an Elite player, do n amount of work and get a code for a decal. That could work.

Although I'd still say that it needs to be literally anything other than planet hunter, because then some troublemaking players will want to see the planets they identified in game. The Mars image checking (I've done a bit of that myself) would be less problematic.


No, adding objects to the existing galaxy is not simply plugging a project's API in. It is massively more complex than that. I refer to the top half of this post: T_Horricks is right, it's not feasible to change the existing galaxy. Again, apologies if that isn't what you're asking for.

You raise valid points. Thanks.
I myself would love to combine the citizen science project with exploring the semi-fictional galaxy of Elite but I can see why it could be problematic for other players. Also, the matter of "reward", as most of the aspects of this idea are open for discussion. It could very well be something cosmetic. I would say, it is kind of what I thought of. The increase in jump range should not be in any way significant. Just a little nod for your effort. But you're right, it requires somewhat deeper analysis.

 

[T_Horrocks]

On the other hand, one could argue this at some previous large update:

Do you use FSS at each new system you visit?

Yes Then you're spending additional time you don't need to. Wouldn't you rather use this to do real science at the same time? (I would.)

No Well, then other players have advantage over you, they earn sometimes large amounts of money you don't. Why are you put in a disadvantageous position? (You're not. It's a choice. You can do other things you chose.)

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying there are different points of view one could consider.