Dissertation Idea Paper
July 26,
2002
The focus of this study is
to develop the systematic framework for an imaging system that is capable of
consistently grading or determining the condition of rare collectibles.
Accurately identifying,
grading and then determining the authenticity of rare collectible items such as
coins, stamps, cards, comic books and artwork is often a subjective
non-automated process conducted by human Appraisers or Graders. The Appraisers
and Graders are usually experts in their respective fields that draw on years
of experience, large established pools of domain knowledge, opinions of other
experts in their field and comprehensive comparisons to other ‘works’ in the
field.
Assigning a grade to coins,
or other rare collectibles, helps to establish the condition and the state of
preservation of the collectible. Accurately determining the condition of a coin
is significant as it is a large contributing factor to determining the value of
a collectible in the marketplace.
On many rare coins a
difference of a single grade can often mean thousands of dollars in difference
in the value of the asset. Sometimes these discrepancies in grades are simply
errors by the graders due to poor training, poor lighting, fatigue or
misinformation. But many times the discrepancies can be attributed to dealers
under-grading items so that they can purchase them for an amount that is
cheaper than what they are worth or over-grading them so that they can sell the
items for more than what they are worth.
Rare coins are presently
graded by human hand and eye inspection that often produces varied,
inconsistent and sometimes dubious results. In instance one grader may assign a
grade of Very Good to a particular rare coin and another grader may assign a
grade of Fine to the same coin.
The problem of inconsistency
in the grading of collectibles is not simply limited to novice collectors or novice
dealers. An excellent website that demonstrates the great diversity of grading
opinions is The Stu Joe
Collection – Grading Challenge. On this site users are asked to assign a
grade to a coin that appears as an obverse and reverse scan. The vast majority
of votes come from seasoned collectors and experienced coin dealers that
frequent the RCC and the PCGS forums.
In the 7 grading challenges conducted thus far the grading results opinions
from the voters loosely form bell curves around the ideal grade.
A major goal of the system
designed in this study is produce a system in which grading will always be
consistent as no human error factors or financial incentive will be introduced into
the grading process.
Numerous similarities exist
between the different types of collectibles (stamps, coins, comic books &
cards). For instance each of these collectibles has a defined set of grading
criteria, each has a large base of domain knowledge, many experts exist is each
area, high priced rarities exist in each of these collectible markets, 3rd
party grading companies exist that offer grading services and there is great
incentive to get authentication and grading right.
This study will concentrate
on the identification, authentication and grading of one area of collectibles,
US coinage. For testing purposes of this study attention will be placed on the
limited denomination of United States coinage that include Lincoln Cents from
1909 to present.
This study will be conducted
from January 2002 until April 2003.
|
Phase |
Description |
Estimated Timeframe |
|
1 |
Document Project Framework
and produce a working plan for the technical features to be contained. |
Jan 2002 – March 2002 |
|
2 |
Work with students in CS
631Q on developing the first part of the grading software and determine
Hardware & Software resource requirements. |
March 2002 – May 2002 |
|
3 |
Review the results of CS
631Q, document and analyze the results |
May 2002 – Sept. 2002 |
|
4 |
Interact with Coin Grading
Industry Experts, review the literature and refine the project scope. |
May 2002 – Dec. 2002 |
|
5 |
Define the project
requirements for the CS615-616 Team members. |
May 2002 |
|
6 |
Work with students in CS
615-616 on the second part of the grading system which includes the
Construction of Prototype Databases (Graphic Images Databases, Valuation
Databases, Counterfeit & Alternations Database) |
Sept. 2002 – April. 2003 |
|
7 |
Work on Manuscript |
Sept 2002 – April 2003 |
|
8 |
Internal Testing &
Modification of CS 615-616 work and analysis of the results. |
Dec. 2002 – Feb 2003 |
|
9 |
Write companion paper |
April 2003 |
|
10 |
Defend Research Project |
May 2003 |
|
11 |
Post Dissertation: Work
with other teams to continue the development and to expand the scope of
testing to other series and denominations. |
Beyond May 2003 |
|
12 |
Live happily ever after |
Post Graduation |
Preliminary References:
1. Alan Herbert, “Coin Clinic,” Krause Publications,
1995 pp 77-79
2.
Scott A. Travers, “How
To Make Money in Coins Right Now”, House of Collectibles, 1996 pp 79-89
3. Q. David Bowers and Scott A. Travers, “Official Guide
to Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection”, PCGS, 1997 pp 90-95
4. “Official A.N.A. Grading Standards for US Coins”,
American Numismatic Association, 1996 pp 85-88
5.
David L. Gantz,
“Planning Your Rare Coin Retirement,” Bonus Books, Inc., 1998 pp 9-25
6.
James Ruddy, “Photograde,”
Whitman Publishing, 1995 pp 73-74
7.
Scott A. Travers, “The
Coin Collector’s Survival Manual,” Bonus Books, Inc., 1996 pp 14-84
8.
Sung-Hyuk Cha and Sargur N. Srihari, “On Measuring The Distance Between
Histograms,” J. Pattern Recognition, Vol 35-6, 2002, pp 1355-1370.
9. Sung-Hyuk Cha, “Histogram Based Image Indexing and Retrieval”,
Technical Report Number 173, CSIS, Pace University, 2002.
10. Jim Halperin,
“How to Grade U.S Coins,” Ivy Press Books, 1990
11. The StuJoe Grading Challenge – Web URL: http://www.thestujoecollection.com/grade/grade.htm