MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001241556 · doi:10.1017/s095252380421313x

Ability of the D-15 panel tests and HRR pseudoisochromatic plates to predict performance in naming VDT colors

2004· article· en· W2001241556 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

VenueVisual Neuroscience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAudiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Color codes in VDT displays often contain sets of colors that are confusing to individuals with color-vision deficiencies. The purpose of this study is to determine whether individuals with color-vision deficiencies (color defectives) can perform as well as individuals without color-vision deficiencies (color normals) on a colored VDT display used in the railway industry and to determine whether clinical color-vision tests can predict their performance. Of the 52 color defectives, 58% failed the VDT test. The kappa coefficients of agreement for the Farnsworth D-15, Adams desaturated D-15, and Richmond 3rd Edition HRR PIC diagnostic plates were significantly greater than chance. In particular, the D-15 tests have a high probability of predicting who fails the practical test. However, all three tests had an unacceptably high false-negative rate (9.5-35%); so that a practical test is still needed.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.266 · 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