Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Fake Banner
By Alex Antunes | March 24th 2009 08:12 AM | 2 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More The Daytime Astronomer articles

All

About Alex Antunes

In "The Sky By Day", Dr. Alex Antunes serves twice-weekly slices of life from the sometimes strange, sometimes oddly normal workday of a NASA astrophysicist. Readers get the inside scoop on what... Full Bio

A shock hit NASA's Mission Madness tournament when the fight between the SPB balloon mission and the MER rovers "Spirit" and "Opportunity" escalated to unexpected levels. And now you can find out just how this happened.

'Mission Madness' is a NASA Edge-run voting contest where the public gets to vote for their favorite mission, in a series of 1-on-1 brackets leading to the final winner.

In round 1, last week, the Superpressure Balloon mission (SPB) was pitted against the Mars Exploratory Rovers (MER), better known as Spirit and Opportunity. On one hand, you have a balloon almost one and a half football fields in size, able to fly for more than 50 days. On the other side, two plucky rovers that have survived Mars's worst for longer than anyone could have expected.

What made the voting so unusual was the huge number of votes received. Most of the brackets were getting 3-5000 votes. Friendship 7 versus SR-71, 1750 to 2088. Apollo 11 vs Mars Phoenix, 2758 to 2584. But SPB versus MER? 16781 versus 15559-- four or five times as many votes as any other bracket!

Who was voting for these, was the system being gamed, is corruption lurking in the heart of Mission Madness? We'll answer these questions here and now!

First, on the rover side, there was a strong effort from both project scientists and general rover fans. Yes, Spirit & Opportunity use twitter: @MarsRovers (though curiously down at the time of this article's first posting). One advocate, Keri Bean (@aggieastronaut), pushed for Mars fans to even the score. All part of the game-- this is indeed a vote early, vote often event.

But there were allegations that the balloon count was being inflated by an auto-voting 'bot or, as put rather dramatically, Either that or some rover-hating sociopath has way too much time on his hands. Harsh allegations indeed, clearly both MER and SPB supporters have an emotional stake in this. Time to do research.

Chris at NASA Edge agreed that "the SPB win over the Mars Rovers was a shock to many Mars fans across the country". I asked Chris whether there was a clear sign of a 'bot for SPB, whether all the votes were coming from a single IP address. And indeed they were not-- the votes were legit. Chris was on top of the situation already, and had this to add:

So according to the Superpressure Balloon team, they wanted to make sure many more people would learn about their mission success and the important information it provided. They are networking with Wallops Flight Facility, Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility, Aerostar Balloon Facility, scientists and their teams, and students at New Mexico State University who participate in the NASA Balloon Program sponsored “Suborbital Center of Excellence” all voting SPB to make it to the next round.

Chris concludes with, "If that is not team work then I do not know what is", a statement I heartily agree with. My earlier predictions about MER falling to acronym obscurity certainly did not happen, instead, we have this very interesting social experiment. Stay tuned for future rounds!

If you're new to Mission Madness, there's still more brackets to vote, up to the finale in early April. You can vote on round 3 on March 26-27 (Thursday and Friday of this week), and NASA Edge are providing updates on the voting via Twitter.

Until next round,

Alex, the Daytime Astronomer

Comments

I call BS. Every mission has people pulling for it. The fact that the balloon thing could even come close to MER is ludicrous. It completely destroys any credibility this contest may have had. Just look at the numbers. They're pulling down three times the number of votes than any of the other 63 missions (with the exception of MER). I smell a rat. Someone is gaming this system.

antunes's picture
Tracing Twitter posts, I'm inclined to agree with Chris at NASA Edge and think this was legitimate competitive voting.  MER did an initial grassroots, then when the surprising SPB results came in, ramped up their efforts.  SPB responded in kind.  Both sides had multiple vectors.  SPB eeked out the win.

Statistically, whatever 'the general public' (defined as "the people that voted for each pairing once or twice as interested participants) were totally washed away in the MER-vs-SPB dedicated voting battle.  Whatever the general public thought got lost.  I will note that I was not alone in predicting MER would have an uphill battle because most people don't know MER means "Spirit&Opportunity", so MER was already at a disadvantage.

When I first saw the results, I thought it was gaming, but once I did some fact-checking, it does seem to bear out that it's legit.  Bear in mind that you can vote multiple times, so a lot of what we'd consider gaming the system is allowed.  I would have restricted it to 1 per IP myself.  Just four dedicated post-docs or grad students per mission can easily rack up 5,000 votes per day for their candidate without breaking a sweat.

As far as each mission having people pulling for it, technically true but not to this degree.  For example, I do know SOHO and STEREO had a, well, lackluster 'get out the vote'-- a few casual emails among the faithful with a 'please vote'.

That is not nearly the same as an organized campaign using Twitter feeds to track in real time and persuade people to do multiples, using existing fan audiences.  Really, it was a triumph in getting out the vote and motivating the teams.

I wonder if there'll be enough of an SPB backlash to knock it out two rounds from now, hmm?

That's my take on things,
Alex, the daytime astronomer


Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.