diggindaboot
Elite Member
I'd recommend checking out that video, as it states, the configurations needs to be randomized by a computer to eliminate bias and any unforeseen relationships between coil geometry and target separation / iron unmasking.
These people are testing specific scenarios. I am interested in the detector that wins a higher percentage of randomized scenarios, because that detector will unmask more over the long run, via the law of large numbers.
One thing I think is missing from the iron-unmasking discussion is the concept of false-positives. e.g. one could hypothetically design a detector that gives a non-ferrous tone on all ferrous signals and then when subjected to these iron-unmasking "tests" it would appear to succeed in all of them, but when taken out into the field, it would obviously be problematic.
Specifically, if one detector unmasks more than another, you would also have to know their comparable false-positive rates to then decided which detector performs better for your needs. E.g. if you are at a hunted out site, accepting better unmasking in exchange for more false positives would be optimal, but the opposite might be optimal at a fresh site.
Yea, uh No. Computers can't determine halo effect. Computers can't determine mineralization. Computers don't know the idiosyncrisies of any detector. One could program a computer until their blue in the face and the computer still won't know all the factors involved.
Every hunt is random. Every swing exacerbates that randomness. Something a computer can't compute is each hunters swing speed. Here's a scientific fact. If there is a piece of metal in the ground within reach. A detector will detect it. Playing detecting video games to try and increase your finds is futile. Learning your detector and using different settings and coils has much more scientific value than a Mario cartoon. Monte's test gives you actual visuals and tones that are applicable to get you on your way. A computer could simulate 50,000 scenarios and you won't know which one it was because you can't actually view the targets in the ground.