Known Failure Cases: Understanding the Limitations of Our Application

As part of our commitment to transparency and continuous improvement, we are actively collecting and documenting failure cases encountered in our application. These cases include both false positives and false negatives, which highlight the limitations of our app's performance.

By sharing these known failures, we aim to provide our users with a comprehensive understanding of the boundaries and constraints of our application's capabilities. This transparency enables users to make informed decisions and manage expectations accordingly.

Differentiating a fake coin closely mirroring the precious metal content of a genuine one presents a challenge during the sound test. This particular fake coin falls near the test's limit, complicating the distinction. This limitation has been mentioned at the end of the user manual.

Coins crafted from tin and from silver may produce similar sound components when they share the same shape. However, their distinct weight serves as a crucial differentiating factor. To ensure accurate identification, it is essential to carefully consider the weight of the coins.

This emphasizes the importance for users to verify both the size and weight of the coin before conducting tests. Section Common mistakes & Best practices may provide further information.

Advanced counterfeiters may use high silver content alloys that closely mimic the acoustic properties of genuine 90% silver coins. When the fake coin's precious metal content approaches that of the genuine coin, the sound test reaches its detection limit, making differentiation extremely challenging.

This case highlights the critical importance of comprehensive verification by experts is required for high premium collectable coins. We have discussed this case in details in our blog post about morgan dollar.