MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997380547 · doi:10.1002/col.20020

A critical review of the development of the CIE1931 RGB color‐matching functions

2004· review· en· W1997380547 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

VenueColor Research & Application · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromaticityRGB color modelMatching (statistics)Computer scienceWrightDevelopment (topology)Information retrievalArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmData miningMathematicsStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article describes the development of the CIE1931 chromaticity coordinates and color‐matching functions starting from the initial experimental data of W. D. Wright and J. Guild. Sufficient information is given to allow the reader to reproduce and verify the results obtained at each stage of the calculations and to analyze critically the procedures used. Unfortunately, some of the information required for the coordinate transformations was never published and the appended tables provide likely versions of that missing data. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 29, 267–272, 2004; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/col.20020

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.333 · 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