MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970558503 · doi:10.1080/15502724.2014.989802

Tutorial: Color Rendering and Its Applications in Lighting

2015· article· en· W1970558503 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLEUKOS The Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersVlaamse regeringFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsRendering (computer graphics)Color rendering indexComputer sciencePerceptionArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)Strengths and weaknessesComputer visionPsychologyOpticsWhite lightPhysicsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This tutorial explains how the human perception of color rendering arises, in terms of the underlying phenomena of light and vision, and using those concepts it presents a clear explanation of the CIE Color Rendering Index. The strengths and weaknesses of the CIE Color Rendering Index are reviewed and some common misunderstandings about color rendering are addressed. It is suitable for self-study, with learning outcomes stated at the beginning and a conceptual summary provided at the end.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it