"Add view" include autoclass results

[eepeacock]

When you go into the annotation tool the ~4th screen is for "ADD VIEW"

At the bottom of add view page, there are two options, "Sort by user power", or "sort by annotation date". Currently, if you add a view of a class for the selected files that have no manual annotation results, then the tool just says "there are not rois in the selected views" or some such thing.

This wasn't a bug, it was what we thought we needed before the new autoclassifier.

Now we would like to be able to select a view, and have the tool also see what's available from the autoclass results when it decides if there are rois in a class or not - this can be true no matter which option is selected under add views.

Once in the tool, prioritization for the display can be from the "filter by" menu as usual.

Does that make sense?

[joefutrelle]

We discussed something else as well, which was adding "autoclass only" as an option for "filter by". I'm unclear on what that means.

In terms of "sort by user power" or "sort by annotation date", those basically don't apply to autoclass results, right?

I'm not really clear on what a view is.

[LouisK130]

A view is just some combination of class and/or tag(s) that the user is interested in seeing. When views are manually selected, the bins are filtered down such that any that don't include ROIs in the given views are omitted. This prevents unnecessary requests and the display of "empty" bins when the user is clicking through.

The "filter by" dropdown is completely separate from views or bin filtering (these things control which data the server collects and sends to the client). The "filter by" dropdown merely hides some ROIs temporarily on the client's display. To be clear, this can hide ROIs in the current view. It cannot change which view a ROI appears in. I think Emily's getting at an issue where the autoclassifier is outperforming humans (particularly in the case of old manual classifications), and she wants to force the auto results to appear at the top. Hence, I think she wants a "classifier only" option when choosing how to sort, not filter (i.e. an alternative to "sort by user power" or "sort by annotation date").

Bin filtering is a different issue. Currently, the selected bins are pared down to include only those that match the view requirements, then classifier results are fetched and included for each bin in this narrowed list. Emily would like this to be reversed, such that classifier results are fetched first and considered during filtering. This would mean that every single bin the user selects will need to have its classifier results loaded and analyzed. I'm not sure of the performance effects this will have.

Furthermore, I suspect this is not an altogether simple thing to implement. We can't consider manual results and auto results separately during filtering, as we need to know the "top level annotation" (which varies based on the "sort by" selection, particularly if we make the change discussed above). A first pass at the logic looks like:

1. Filter bins as we are right now, based only on manual results
2. Filter bins based only on auto results
3. Take the final result as the union of the two sets of bins

However in step 2, I believe that we would need to consider only those ROIs that have no manual results (unless the "sort" mode is the new "classifier only" setting, in which case we can ignore manual results entirely, i.e. skip step 1).