https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/camera-scoring-system-errors Changes to this claim in Matteo Campagna's evidence registry: its status, its year-by-year history, revisions of the page. en-gb https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/camera-scoring-system-errorsEvery prototype tested makes errors, and their causes are described well in only one paper. A 2017 thesis, written at the request of the Dutch federation, tested a computer vision system on six training videos: 29 arrows out of 32 were given the correct zone, and the three misses had three different causes. One arrow shifted the target face as it went in and the program read a ten as 9.85; another stuck out too little in the image to be recognised as a shaft, and lowering the threshold makes arrows appear that are not there; a third, arriving during a sharp change in light, was discarded. The program had, however, been tuned on those same six videos. Later tests confirm that errors happen, with other causes: a two-camera prototype read 14 arrows out of 16 correctly from above and 11 from the side, and the author blames the side camera's calibration; in 2025 a system tested in the field on 100 shots by 10 archers failed to see 9 arrows and gave the correct score to 67, and the authors point to light, arrows close to the line and overlapping arrows; and systems that count holes from photographs mostly miss the overlapping holes of the tightest ends and take tears in worn faces for holes. The tests on arrows shot and read one by one go no further than a hundred arrows, the hole counting from photographs comes from a single archer, and no test compares the system with the judges during a competition.claim:punteggio-automatico-telecamera:revision:2026-04-24:3Fri, 24 Apr 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/camera-scoring-system-errorsclaim:punteggio-automatico-telecamera:new_claim:2026-04-06:riportatoMon, 06 Apr 2026 08:00:00 GMT