Suggest you use the quarter scans to minimize loss of time.
Granted you don't get the overall top 20 hits. You will get the top 5 or 10 hits from each quarter of a logical scan segment. While not as ideal, this works over time.
As to saving data from an aborted scan, how do you justify and calculate what the top hits are from incomplete data?
Honestly, you might as well as just select frequencies at random, take the 20 you like best, and run with it and see how the target fairs.
While I know this would be an awesome thing to have, from a statistical analysis point of view, it is very flawed.
Also, if your scans are taking that much longer to complete over the estimated time, the sensor is not being worn in a good location or the target has a very erratic heart rate. Typically, much can be improved learning where and how to position the sensor for accurate readings.
Delays are a result of data read errors, and the system requires 3 consecutive valid reads to resume the scan. Having too many bad data reads can extend a scan out a long time.
Perhaps I'm missing a key point.
So let me ask a few questions so I have a better frame of reference.
You set off to scan 3800 frequencies, for which you want the top 20 hits so you know you are treating the most pressing areas the body responded to.
You only get through the first 380 frequencies. What do you want the system to return? The top 20 hits of those 380?
What if your top issues are not in the first 10% of the scan range? What if those 380 frequencies don't even have any relevance to the body at all?
Do we feel spending a week or two applying hits from those 380 frequencies is a good use of time?
What makes a top 20 list from a full scan relevant is that they stand on top of all possible frequencies from a logical segment. Asking for the top 20 from a partial list will always return 20 frequencies, but they have no context to establish relevance. Biofeedback does not have some special condition to evaluate that says, "this hit is a valid hit". It just sorts and gives back data. What and how you scan gives those hits relevance.
Sorry to ask so many questions, but I'm trying to identify the value in a partial scan save.
It would be ideal if we could save the frequencies that would have been a top hit from all 3800, but without all 3800 scanned, it is not possible.
Open to suggestions on how to make a partial scan relevant. If any can be identified, then perhaps JW will make some time to add the feature. Without a relevant use, I don't ever see it happening as it doesn't actually improve the user experience. It only gives a false sense of an improved experience.
For more details, please check the link: