CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] The damn robot won

To: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>,K0HB <K0HB@ARRL.ORG>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The damn robot won
From: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 13:52:41 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I'm still hoping that one of the guys who was involved will tell us 
how the Skimmer number was arrived at, and particularly what 
validation level was used.  With 3 KHz of audio from a typical audio 
tape, Skimmer would "hear" much the same muddle as a human.  If a 
second signal appears on exactly (or close to) the same frequency, it 
gets as confused as we do.  But in any case, nobody is suggesting 
that a human mind can do what a properly implemented Skimmer can do, 
even in a 3 KHz bandwidth.

73, Pete N4ZR

At 04:59 PM 5/27/2009, Michael Tope wrote:

>Doesn't skimmer implement more than one demodulator (i.e it can
>demodulate multiple code streams simultaneously provided that there is
>enough frequency offset between the streams to allow for filtering) ? An
>interesting comparison would be to add up the total number of unique
>calls copied by all the human operators (i.e. the gang of human
>demodulators) and then compare that with Skimmer (i.e. the gang of
>robotic demodulators).
>
>73, Mike W4EF......
>
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>