MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015931225 · doi:10.1167/4.11.57

Detection of depth order from chromatic aberration of defocused images

2004· article· en· W2015931225 on OpenAlexaff
I. P. Howard, Vincent Nguyen, Robert S. Allison

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccommodationMonochromatic colorOpticsChromatic scaleChromatic aberrationAchromatic lensMathematicsEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionFixation (population genetics)Chromatic adaptationPhysicsComputer visionComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sign of an accommodative response is provided by differences in chromatic aberration between under- and over-accommodated images. We asked whether these differences enable people to judge the depth order of two stimuli in the absence of other depth cues. Two vertical test edges separated laterally by an illuminated gap were presented to one eye with one edge at random distances relative to the other fixed edge. The fixed edge was at the same distance as two coplanar pre-fixation edges. In one condition, exposure duration was brief so that accommodation could not change. In other conditions exposure was prolonged and subjects either continued to fixate the fixed edge or changed their accommodation between the two test edges. The gap was illuminated with tungsten light or monochromatic light. Subjects could detect image blur of about 0.3 D with brief exposure for both types of light. However, they could detect depth order only in tungsten light with long exposure, with or without changes in accommodation.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207