• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Will computers replace human graders?

Started by Merc,

26 posts in this topic

Merc

Merc

Posted
Posted

I'm sure this has been asked sometime before, but what do you think. Will computers with scanners and microscopes replace human graders? I think I read where PCGS toyed with the idea.

 

I work with microscopes attached to high-res digital cameras. The pictures are instantly stored on a computer server. Could this technology be applied to coin grading?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
James_OldeTowne

James_OldeTowne

Posted
Posted

I don't think so - I sure hope not! How do you teach a computer what kind of toning, or originality, is subjectively nicer than average, and worthy of an upswing in grade? Or for that matter, how do you teach it that another kind of toning is sujectively very ugly, and requires a downgrade? I just don't see that it can be done.

 

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HaydenTubbs

HaydenTubbs

Posted
Posted

I had read that several coin grading service experimented with this idea. PCGS had the "PCGS Expert" and ANACS was said to have a machine that they were testing as well. Interestingly enough the chapter I read was very optimistic and a direct quote from the VAM book states:

"Ultimately the improved grading capabilities offered by computerized grading machines will lead to more consistent grading and to the betterment of the hobby."

 

and yet were are we today? 27_laughing.gif !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmarguli

gmarguli

Posted
Posted

If it were possible and accurate all the time, it would stop resubmissions - which are a decent source of revenue for the grading companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Norinn Radd

Norinn Radd

Posted
Posted
If it were possible and accurate all the time, it would stop resubmissions - which are a decent source of revenue for the grading companies.

 

Always the optimist, eh Greg? poke2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted
If it were possible and accurate all the time, it would stop resubmissions - which are a decent source of revenue for the grading companies.

 

Always the optimist, eh Greg? poke2.gif

 

Yeah, but it's the truth. I've never felt there was ANY incentive for the TPG's to be consistant. There is too much money to be made with the inefficent market....

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oldtrader3

Oldtrader3

Posted
Posted

Grading is both subjective and objective. The objective part could probably be done by computerized vision systems. The subjective portion requires a human brain to intepret what attributes (toning etc.) it is seeing through human eyes. I don't think a machine without highly refined, specific, artificial intelligence could grade a coin. This technology does not exist now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
supertooth

supertooth

Posted
Posted

Way to go Charlie----Now, if the computers could do the "objective grading"---technical grading-----Why could we not then still employ a human grader to then interpret the "eye appeal", "toning", Original or Not Original Skin of the coin---And then come up with the "subjective" opinion. Put both grades onto the holder. But give the grader the benefit of first seeing the computer grade before his evaluation. I know that a lot of folks would complain about putting two grades onto the holder. But I for one would feel better knowing both opinions. The final opinion would still be left up to the 'buyer" of the coin. Bob [supertooth]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted

Why could we not then still employ a human grader to then interpret the "eye appeal", "toning", Original or Not Original Skin of the coin---And then come up with the "subjective" opinion

 

I agree with this but I think this "human grader" should simply be the eventual buyer. Let the market decide if the coin has better (or worse) eye appeal....and whether to pay a premium or not.

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted
Way to go Charlie----Now, if the computers could do the "objective grading"---technical grading-----Why could we not then still employ a human grader to then interpret the "eye appeal", "toning", Original or Not Original Skin of the coin---And then come up with the "subjective" opinion. Put both grades onto the holder. But give the grader the benefit of first seeing the computer grade before his evaluation. I know that a lot of folks would complain about putting two grades onto the holder. But I for one would feel better knowing both opinions. The final opinion would still be left up to the 'buyer" of the coin. Bob [supertooth]

 

MS68*DMPLerMS64??????????????

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmarguli

gmarguli

Posted
Posted
I agree with this but I think this "human grader" should simply be the eventual buyer. Let the market decide if the coin has better (or worse) eye appeal....and whether to pay a premium or not.

 

jom

 

screwy.gifscrewy.gifscrewy.gifscrewy.gifscrewy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted
I agree with this but I think this "human grader" should simply be the eventual buyer. Let the market decide if the coin has better (or worse) eye appeal....and whether to pay a premium or not.

 

jom

 

screwy.gifscrewy.gifscrewy.gifscrewy.gifscrewy.gif

 

stooges.gif893whatthe.gifstooges.gif893whatthe.gif

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cladking

cladking

Posted
Posted

Coins will be graded by machines eventually but it will be some time until they can consistently grade most coins. Many coins can already be graded quite accurately and repeatably by computers but there are still too many that would "throw" the programming. It may not be very long until there is computer assisted grading but it won't be big until a human isn't needed for more than a few percent of coins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
midwest

midwest

Posted
Posted
Will computers replace human graders?

 

As though that would eliminate differences of opinion. 27_laughing.gif

 

I can't wait for the day where the dealer tries to convince me the coin I want is worth a premium because the machine grading it was running linux yeahok.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bruceswar

Bruceswar

Posted
Posted
Will computers replace human graders?

 

As though that would eliminate differences of opinion. 27_laughing.gif

 

I can't wait for the day where the dealer tries to convince me the coin I want is worth a premium because the machine grading it was running linux yeahok.gif

 

27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EZ_E

EZ_E

Posted
Posted

I doubt it. How can a machine learn what beauty is? Does even an animal recognize it? More than likely, it is a characteristic unique to man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted

The computer would consider only the technical merits and the warm-bodied grader would consider only the aesthetic merits without knowing the computer grade. A final review before QC would "blend" the two together. 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IGWT

IGWT

Posted
Posted
The computer would consider only the technical merits and the warm-bodied grader would consider only the aesthetic merits without knowing the computer grade. A final review before QC would "blend" the two together. 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

How do you pull aesthetics and "technical" merits apart? Technical merits -- if we're talking strike, luster, and marks/hits -- collectively determine aesthetics. Even if the two concepts are separable, I doubt that a grader could completely ignore the "technical" merits of a coin in assessing its aesthetic value. And, even if it were possible, an opinion on "aesthetic" merit would be pointless; beauty is always in the eye of the beholder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oldtrader3

Oldtrader3

Posted
Posted

That is why I mentioned development of specific Artificial Intelligence to support the qualitative machine interpretation of beauty and toning attributes. This level of artificial intelligence will not be available until some time in the future

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted
The computer would consider only the technical merits and the warm-bodied grader would consider only the aesthetic merits without knowing the computer grade. A final review before QC would "blend" the two together. 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

How do you pull aesthetics and "technical" merits apart? Technical merits -- if we're talking strike, luster, and marks/hits -- collectively determine aesthetics. Even if the two concepts are separable, I doubt that a grader could completely ignore the "technical" merits of a coin in assessing its aesthetic value. And, even if it were possible, an opinion on "aesthetic" merit would be pointless; beauty is always in the eye of the beholder.

 

Don't ask me! That's for a computer geek to figure out.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EZ_E

EZ_E

Posted
Posted

 

Don't ask me! That's for a computer geek to figure out.

 

Chris

 

Don't you mean "the introverted, computer personnel"? tongue.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
midwest

midwest

Posted
Posted

 

Don't ask me! That's for a computer geek to figure out.

 

Chris

 

Don't you mean "the introverted, computer personnel"? tongue.gif

 

Sorry Victor you don't qualify for that title. Now replace computer with laserdisc, betamax, 8-track, or Victrola then you are WELL qualified tongue.gif

 

poke2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing