ARV Studio Software

IgorG

Member
Hi all,

I'm one of the GMs at Applied Precognition Project. I'd like to spread the word about my software that I developed and it was released recently: ARV Studio.
All info about it you can find on my website:
www.arv-studio.com
Check out the demo version.

Demo version is free for anyone to try and see how the program works and to go through ARV phases without any limitations. No restrictions on functionalities in demo. Demo version does all what full version does too. Except 3 features described below -- but they do not effect program's use and process flow.

Also, I just made available new build of demo version with demo targets improved: you can do a real RV/ARV (10 trials) with demo targets (small sized images), but full sized quality images are included in full version.

Quick info about the software:
ARV Studio is standalone software product developed to help automate the Associative Remote Viewing (ARV) process and minimize time needed while managing a group of Remote Viewers or while performing as a solo remote viewer and for the purpose of conducting ARV trials/events. ARV Studio also features the Remote Viewing (RV) of practice photo targets while keeping the user blind to the target.

Modes/Protocols:
-RV practice photo target
-Standard binary ARV – solo mode self-judging
-Standard binary ARV – solo mode with independent judge
-Standard binary ARV – group mode (of N Remote Viewers)
-Sensory solo mode based on Sounds

Key features:
PREMIUM1000: includes 1000 thoughtfully selected quality photo targets ready for your RV/ARV trials. PREMIUM1000 is exclusive and unique photo target collection designed for the purpose of RV/ARV.
ARVOPTIMAL: built-in powerful ARV target pairing algorithm which ensures blind and random selection of RV/ARV photo targets. The algorithm ensures dissimilarity of the selected photo targets, meaning that they are as different from each other as possible, thus creating most optimal conditions for your best RV/ARV performance.
ARVGUARD: built-in safeguard algorithm which ensures non-repetition of selected photo target in the next 100 RV sessions and next 50 ARV trials.

Software was tested and reviewed by Jon Knowles: "It's the best stand-alone ARV program available", and Alexis Poquiz: "There is no other software around that replicates what ARV Studio does"

Live demo: https://youtu.be/TDjs0TnsoiQ

Thank you
Best regards
Igor
 

PJ

Administrator
Staff member
Demo version includes dummy photo target set not suitable for real RV
Much as I want to support all good efforts, advertising straight up is against policy at TKR.

A demo version that allowed at least one legitimate use would at least be offering something free. Or something else already free packaged with your demo version.

I'll leave it for a week which we've never actually done before, but if not updated it'll have to bounce for spam. Truly sorry. Please find a way to make it pass.

PJ
 

IgorG

Member
PJ, thanks for your input and sorry I didn't realized I shouldn't send a post in a way I did.
I modified my initial post and included the following regarding: "something else already free packaged with your demo":
Demo version is free for anyone to try and see how the program works and to go through ARV phases without any limitations. No restrictions on functionalities in demo. Demo version does all what full version does too. Except 3 features described in my initial post -- but they do not effect program's use and process flow.

Also, I just made available new build of demo version with demo targets improved: you can do a real RV/ARV (10 trials) with demo targets now (small sized images), but full sized quality images are included in full version.
Best regards
Igor
 

fletch

New Member
Not a bad idea. One suggestion though. You might consider a version that runs natively in Linux for us 'nix users. It runs in WINE but not without glitches. For any other 'nix users you'll have to install Gecko for WINE from your repository if you want to try the demo.
 

IgorG

Member
fletch said:
WINE but not without glitches. For any other 'nix users you'll have to install Gecko for WINE from your repository if you want to try the demo.
I will have to check what Gecko is.
At some time I was trying with Winebottler inside of my Virtual MacOS machine on Windows but it doesn't work well/crashes. I don't have resources to rebuilt it for Linux/or Mac. I'm one-man-enthusiast. It took me 6 months to develop the software.
The best way is to run virtual Windows 7/8/10 via VirtualBox.
 

IgorG

Member
snorble said:
Hi, nice software. What language is it written in? Can it do Jon's Unitary ARV?
Visual Basic 2015. I was discussing with Jon about implementing Unitary ARV, but didn't do it as Jon will do his series in his own way. Still, it would be easy thing to implement.
 

mscir

Member
How is Unitary ARV done? Do you have a url explaining it? I'm wondering if a web based version would be possible.
 

IgorG

Member
mscir said:
How is Unitary ARV done? Do you have a url explaining it? I'm wondering if a web based version would be possible.
Here are my notes (copy/paste) on UARV based on articles from Jon and Don W:

From 8 martinis issue 4: Jon Knowles:
Targets for UARV: may be landscapes,scenes, people, objects, smells, tastes, symbols, shapes,colors, patterns, ideograms, emotions, music, etc

Unitary ARV. For example, one could task the main emotions felt by players or fans of the winning or losing team at the end of a game.

One cue/task example: "Focus on a non-professional gambler at the Sahara Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas who places a straight bet on the Seattle Mariners to beat the LA Dodgers Tuesday June 20, 2006. Focus on this gambler at breakfast time the day after thegame and how he/she feels emotionally about his/her straight bet on the Mariners to win this game.”

From 8 martinis issue 2: Don Walker:
To identify a winner: It could have a tasking like “Viewer will focus on and identify the main color of the winning team’s jersey…”
Another strategy, which we used for a long time with a great deal of success, was based on viewing the primary emotions around the outcome of a particular sporting even. We tasked and focused on prima- ry emotional reactions of groups of people associated with the games. We viewed the players, the fans, etc. at various times in the future, often immediately after the game we were interested in.
Viewing emotions is best. 75-85% hit rate.

And here you will find Youtube link to Jon's webinar:
http://www.dojopsi.info/forum/index.php?topic=9614.0
 

mscir

Member
Thanks for the notes, it's interesting that Viewing emotional reactions has a high rate of accuracy. Maybe I'm missing a lot but it doesn't seem like it would require a program if you have a Tasker who understands the process. What do you think?
 

snorble

New Member
One distinguishing feature of Unitary ARV is there is only one possible target. The idea is to avoid having two or more targets, in hopes of avoiding displacement.
 
Thanks, Igor, for posting the link to my webinar on Strict Unitary ARV (SUARV). The reason for the "strict" is that UARV and 1ARV, as they were used in the APP, sometimes had 2 targets. E.g. one target for one group of viewers, the other target for a second group of viewers. There isn't just one target although it was termed Unitary ARV.

In Strict UARV there is just the one target. E.g. one cue, the focus of which is the emotions of a (usually anonymous) person or group reacting to the outcome of an event.

Suppose you use 3 cues for the viewer for the same event - you could say it is not Strict UARV, strictly speaking, since there are 3 takes on the same event. I would say it is a form of SUARV; just not as "unitary" as having only 1 cue.

BTW, from the trials we've done, it seem 3 cues produces better results. E.g. focus is on 3 different person(s), one in each cue; if a game, then either 2 people who have a strong emotional attachment to their team winning, and 1 person who feels similarly about the other team; or all 3 avid fans (or variant) for the same team.

I encourage others to try this method since it may be the best bet to overcome displacement. It is simple to set up and manage, but the viewer does have to be very good, clearly, at sensing emotions in the future.

Jon
 

PJ

Administrator
Staff member
Igor, thank you for making the demo version something with a few 'real' (if small) targets! I thought people trying something out would really benefit from having something 'real' to demo for the psi not just the protocol and that's perfect. Hope your handy software does well.

Hi Jon,
it seem 3 cues produces better results. E.g. focus is on 3 different person(s), one in each cue
To me that is 3 targets. They may be 'within' a "focus" (e.g. an event, and there is a target on various people and some targets on other elements, all about the one event though) but if the focus is on different people, they're different targets right?

The reason I ask is that I did a lot of short trials over the years of 3 sessions on the same task, and I had the rather bizarre experience of very often getting 2 sessions with similar data and one different -- and I am pretty sure (would have to investigate old lab books but I think so) that this was regardless of whether I knew the task was the same solo-blind or whether it was a wildcard so I didn't know task source. Often the 'different' session had far better data and much of what repeated in the other two was wrong entirely. I never did more work on this to try and nail down why, it's just one of many anomalies I saw in my own stuff over time. Maybe I should do some comparing multiple tasks under an umbrella focii to the multiple sessions under a single task.

Greg K did say he thought volume made a real difference, but his volume was so huge that was just crazy. It's no wonder he ran out of time to continue with it for awhile.

Of course he was off training and setting world records so I don't think my time excuses can begin to compare to his ha! :D

Do you guys share stats (meaning success per viewer, judge, and viewer+judge) data publicly, or is that private? I ask because one of my interests is in the dynamic energy between 2 or more people and how it might affect the eventual results of shared efforts. Stats with varying people in different roles over time would likely show if that's a real effect.

P
 
PJ wrote:

To me that is 3 targets. They may be 'within' a "focus" (e.g. an event, and there is a target on various people and some targets on other elements, all about the one event though) but if the focus is on different people, they're different targets right?
Yes, 3 different foci for one event, 3 different targets, if one wants. But: each one is unitary, not binary (emotions are not binary) and there shouldn't (can't) be the kind of displacement that is "baked into" classic binary ARV.

The reason I ask is that I did a lot of short trials over the years of 3 sessions on the same task, and I had the rather bizarre experience of very often getting 2 sessions with similar data and one different -- and I am pretty sure (would have to investigate old lab books but I think so) that this was regardless of whether I knew the task was the same solo-blind or whether it was a wildcard so I didn't know task source. Often the 'different' session had far better data and much of what repeated in the other two was wrong entirely. I never did more work on this to try and nail down why, it's just one of many anomalies I saw in my own stuff over time. Maybe I should do some comparing multiple tasks under an umbrella focii to the multiple sessions under a single task.
If I recall correctly, reading your writing about this, you were viewing the same target (photo from a pool) several times and came up with different data each time. I've had that happen too. But, if I understand you, this is quite different - viewing three different person(s) in relation to the same event. Also, SUARV, so far, is about emotions, not impressions of photos (photosites). So seems to me there are significant differences. And I haven't seen (in 2006 or now) that one session's impressions are markedly different from the other two.

Greg K did say he thought volume made a real difference, but his volume was so huge that was just crazy. It's no wonder he ran out of time to continue with it for awhile.
Yes, he said the effect was small, so many trials were needed to be confident in a result.

Do you guys share stats (meaning success per viewer, judge, and viewer+judge) data publicly, or is that private? I ask because one of my interests is in the dynamic energy between 2 or more people and how it might affect the eventual results of shared efforts. Stats with varying people in different roles over time would likely show if that's a real effect.
Each year Marty presents the stats for the year since the last APP Conference. These are available to the public as well. That includes all the groups in the APP. The data is broken down by group. We were and again will be working (Marty mainly with my help) to extract the data by viewer in each group. Right now all focus is on the Conference.

In the meantime, Marty is aware of and tracks individual viewer data in some groups. (And it is from that set that Marty invites people with high rates of success to "Become a Paid Procoger".) We can't yet track all the groups because of our two methods of data collection. I'll spare you the details.

I do think that the relation between say, viewer and group manager, in a group of 2, may be significant. We don't have stats on that either yet. Then there is the question of the overall dynamic between a group manager and a larger group. We have stats for how each Group Manager is doing with his/her group and the particular methods they are using.

But with all the effort that has been put into this, our stats need a lot more work - beyond basic hit rates, pass rates, etc.
Plug: We are always open to anyone who wants to volunteer to help do the staff work (including an R programmer if anyone is reading this and is one! We now have 582 people on our Discussion List with about 60 full (Paid members) and about the same number viewing each week. So there is a lot to be done! Fortunately 2 people have joined our volunteer staff in recent weeks, which helps - but no programmers yet.)

Jon
 
Snorble,

We switched to using R for data analysis. It's fast, free, great for graphs, huge support community. Marty is the lead person and has done a ton; I help some but am not highly skilled with R and will be getting back to more viewing soon. Marty is already doing the work of 3 or 4 people for APP, which continues to expand and will need more staff. Unfortunately it's all volunteer at this point.

Jon
 
Top