Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Player
Hmmmm...
This introduces something new into your test.
The determination of which of the five possible target locations is to be decided by the operator of the Examiner rather than by a test proctor observing where the Examiner is pointing. This can be done as you requested.
It appears your test protocol cannot be performed with a single proctor. You want the proctor's job to be divided among several people who submit two separate documents. There is one person to score, and one to record. This becomes necessary because the recorder is required to stand in the area of the operator during his trial and record his decision. Then a separate scorer is required to check to see which location the target is actually located after the trial is done. And a third person is also suggested to be the person who hides the target in one of the five locations.
It looks to me like your protocol requires four people to perform the test:
1. The operator who will hold the Examiner
2. A person who records the operator's choice
3. A person who checks the location of the target after each trial
4. A person who hides the target before each trial
Any other persons present such as spectators or a persons operating cameras must leave the area before each trial so the only person who knows which of the possible five locations the the target is at is person hiding it. Then the person hiding the target must leave the area before everyone returns to perform the next trial.
Do I understand the details of your test protocol correctly?
I have two other questions:
1. Do you have any requirements for the ground that is used to mark out a test area?
2. What do you suggest should be done next in the event that the operator is not able to find the target in plain sight during the pre-test?
Best wishes,
J_P
|
Well, you said you were well aware of ordinary DB protocol, so I didn't feel it necessary to iterate the obvious. If you read over the example that Carl has already described, I don't think I'm suggesting anything different from it.
Please see:
http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...nfo/dbtest.dat
However, what I did discuss I figured would be redundant, since you were already aware of DB protocol.
Answers to your questions:
1. I have no requirements for the ground the target and hiding devices would be on as long as it is an environment that the Examiner would be expected to operate correctly in.
2. The pre and post tests are to verify the device and operator are working correctly. If during several attempts of a pre-test the operator/device does not locate a plain-view target, then you can quickly conclude the device does NOT satisfy the attribute being tested, and I wouldn't see why you should waste time doing the trials.
If a pre-test was successful, than a successful post-test is simply to verify the device/operator are still operating correctly following the trials. If the post-test is not successful, than probably you should consider starting all over from the beginning. Perhaps certain conditions have changed, the device is no longer operating correctly, etc. etc.