Color Vision and Fatigue: An Incidental Finding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Because there is little information available as to how fatigue and color vision interact, we present some incidental findings on how a protanope and a color-normal perform on several color vision tests after 1 night of sleep deprivation. CASE REPORT: A series of clinically and occupationally based color vision tests were administered to a protanope and a color-normal subject after they had stayed awake all night and after a regular night's sleep. There was essentially no change in their performance on the clinical color vision tests; however, both did worse on the occupationally based color vision tests after 1 night of sleep deprivation. The color-normal made numerous errors in identifying colors displayed on a video display terminal, whereas the protanope had a large increase in errors on the CN Lantern Test. Both subjects passed these respective tests after a regular night's sleep. CONCLUSIONS: The primary reason for color-normal's poor performance on the video display terminal test was probably due to a decrement in his visuo-motor control rather than a loss in color discrimination. In contrast, the protanope's poor performance on the lantern test was probably due to the additive effects of the inherent limitations of his visual system and fatigue.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".