Chromatic variations suppress suprathreshold brightness variations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most objects in natural scenes are suprathreshold in both color (chromatic) and luminance contrast. How salient is each dimension? We have developed a novel method employing a stimulus similar to that used by B. C. Regan and J. D. Mollon (1997) who studied the relative saliencies of the two chromatic cardinal directions. Our stimuli consist of left- and right-oblique modulations of color and/or luminance defined within a lattice of circles. In the "separated" condition, the two modulations were presented separately as forced-choice pairs, and the task was to indicate which was more salient. In the "combined" condition, the two orthogonal-in-orientation modulations were added, and the task was to indicate the more salient orientation. The ratio of color to luminance contrast at the PSE was calculated for both conditions. Across color directions, 48% more luminance contrast relative to color contrast was required to achieve a PSE in the "combined" compared to the "separated" condition. A second experiment showed that the PSE difference was due to the luminance being masked by the color, rather than due to superior color grouping. We conclude that suprathreshold brightness variations are masked by suprathreshold color variations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".