Yes, that’s the reason. Simplest solution would probably be to just no remove segments, which ID is lower than, let say, 1000. I don’t know, if there are any actual segments before that thresold, but there’s the brain mesh and neuropils’ meshes (all probably below 100).
Hi KK,
Kai has pushed a fix so that it will skip deselecting the the brain mesh layer when checking out a new cell. He also did the following:
I pushed a change so that it will ignore all neuropil segments now (to be exact: all segments on layers with a source that starts with
precomputed://gs://flywire_neuropil_meshes/).
Hope that helps!
3 Likes
Great! That should work for both the entire brain mash and all neuropils. Thanks! 
2 Likes
This might be a tall order, but is there any way we could add a annotation in form of a tekstbox visible in 3d with for instance up to 10 letters. i am thinking this might be usefull for identification purposes. (have for instance all tm cells in 1-2 farms with annotation with type for each cell, then you could add your cell to the farm and compare it to the known cells)
4 Likes
It might be useful to have a fifth lightbulb colour to indicate that a cell identification has been submitted? Not sure the best way to handle that without hiding the completion status though 
On a slightly related note, it seems like the yellow and green bulb colours are fairly close together for some types of colour blindness
Link to colour blind simulator / colour picker
Swapping the green for something less blue (eg #00C700) might increase the contrast a bit more (the purple (#8300FF) would be a good option for id’d)
4 Likes
I’d say, identification of a cell shouldn’t be possible without completing it first. But then, the act of clicking the Complete button should be enough to treat a cell as completed, so we wouldn’t have to wait at least 24h to identify cell. So maybe yet another status - completed (pending) or something like that ;). And show the Identification option only when a cell is either completed or completed (pending) state.
1 Like
I think ID is still quite useful for non completion, ala when a cell might be missing a CB or branch but is clearly a certain type (and HQ has encouraged in that case). ID is also submitted in a ‘notes’ style where all IDs are listed in the current system, so it doesn’t seem harmful to have IDs submitted if a cell cannot be completed but is obviously a certain type.
3 Likes
Right, I forgot about it. Then maybe we should have two new statuses - “incompleted, identified” and “proofread, not identified”. Or another icon telling only the status of the identification.
1 Like
To me the biggest problem is to have to wait for the lightbulb to change colour after completing it,
the identified/not identified could probably be solved with changing the colour of the box around the lightbulb instead of adding more colours too the lightbulb itself.
If it is not possible to change colour from the database imminently, would it be possible to change it in local storage? rememered to next refresh ( would solve the problem, did i complete this cell or only submit identification, or did i just think i was supposed to do it)
Another thing is that it would probably be easier/less waiting time if you could submit both completion and identification in the same window
3 Likes
Agree on both - different border for different states of identification and both things in one window.
As for doing it locally, I’ll take a look at possibilities somewhere in the near future.
2 Likes
Since we (players) are slowly getting into the cell identification “game” it’d be nice if (unless there is already and i’ve not found it yet) there was somewhere, ie: cell summary, that said if a/the cell had been identified (even if wrongly or partially), cell summary would be a good place imho, along w the number of edits, editors etc that info would fit nicely there, identification(s)/ identifiers (ppl) etc.
Also some way of knowing in fw of if a cell/segment has been identified, a diff. colour light bulb, a symbol on the green L.B. etc, would also be duly appreciated (by me at least hah).
1 Like
For now, you can click on the lightbulb and select “Cell Identification” to check, if the cell has already been identified (and the identification been accepted), but I agree, that a summary for all the information would be really nice.
Different lighbulbs for identified cells would be great to.
1 Like
oh, i had completely missed that haha, thnx!
1 Like
Yeah having the info all in one place would be helpful. I know that currently it’s all split between Cell Summary (Sign in - Google Accounts), ChangeLog, and Cell Identification options on the Lightbulb menu. Those systems were all developed separately, but now I wonder if we can maybe get some of that all combined in the Cell Summary menu option.
4 Likes
If the visible cell id somehow could be changed to a 4 digits id connected to your view and share link + first 14-15 signs of any cell identification done on that cell. That would make it easy too see if there is submitted anything on that cell.
Ofc would have to have same with as now, so it is in one column.
I would be nice to have all info on 1 tab, but opening a tab at all is time consuming and i really dubt anyone is going to do that on every cell.
2 Likes
That’s true, although having to open 1 tab per cell would be a timesaver vs having to open 2 or 3 or 5 etc,
but that does sound like a good idea, you have the segment id ie: 720575940604650668 (random cell chosen), then regardless of how the ######'s change depending on stuff added/removed, if a cell has been given an identification and it has been accepted by admin/researcher then the 720575940604650668 becomes 720575940604650668-Centrifugal / C2 (for example, the chosen segment is actually one of the L’s lol), with the cell id, changing to the latest one submitted and accepted, so if someone else submits it as an L2 then it’d become 720575940604650668- Lamina /L2
Could work, and we’d not have to open a tab for this reason. But ofc idk how feasible/easy it’d be to code (devs side not player script) so that it’d be universal and everyone sees the same ####-cell id
2 Likes
I would still like to be able to name cells locally (as it is with the Names script). I find it useful, when I’m working on a bunch of cells. When I’ve checked/completed a cell, I’m just naming it locally “C”. If the cell doesn’t match, what I’m looking for, I’m naming it “C - doesn’t match”, etc. Then I can hide all the cells, I’ve already checked and don’t have to be worried about refreshing, which changes the order of the cells. Also don’t have to remove the cells from the the right-panel, so I constantly know, which cells I’ve already found.
So, hopefully, the possible changes don’t change the current behaviour of the cells’ names.
As for keeping the identification in the name, I can see some problems, I’ve seen when doing the Names script. When you split an already idenfitied segment, how should you name both parts? If only one of them is the correct one, and the other is a merger, should the merger also have that identified name? What, if you merge two already named cells?
However, these problems are already existing in the current setup, where a cell identified in the Cell Identification tool has been modified since the identification and the name no longer corresponds the the cell.
I believe, there should be some additional popup or something, that when you modified and completing an identified cell, the popup should ask, if the identified type is still correct, with options - yes, no (enter new name or leave the field blank) and I don’t know (so others could check it). When splitting an already completed cell, that would probably also required to ask user to select, which part is the cell, that has already been completed and which is a merger.
3 Likes
Having the current id 720575940604650668 visible and adding a identification would make the id so long that it would not have place in the current room. and the reason i wanted a 4 numbers id + part of identification. That way you could refer to a cell by id when needing help etc. 0668-Centrifugal/C2 (that would ofc work best if it is identified as C2/Centrifugal since some names are longer than the given string and you could risk having only part of identification.)
i guess the 4 numbers could still be named locally or as now that you could override the naming locally.
As for splitting a already named cell. From what i understand the identification is connected to the point you have the cursor when naming it, so that part would have the identification from database. and the other part would only have a number. Agree that it could be useful to have the posibility to say this identification is wrong even if you don´t know what the new identification should be, but think that is part of another problem.
2 Likes
valid points, the 4 numbers idk if it could work solely on i think the reason behind the length or the amount of digits may have to be so that whatever algorithm creates the segment numbers doesn’t run out of numbers ending up giving more than 1 diff. segments the same exact number Ie: 12345, with 4 digits it’s a lot less iterations than 20-30 (haven’t counted them) in the existing amount.
1 Like
you would have to have the current id in the background/database just not visible in our view. 4 digits should be more than enogh that every open cell could get their own local id without crashing the tab
2 Likes