The Effect of Crosstalk on the Perceived Depth From Disparity and Monocular Occlusions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crosstalk in stereoscopic displays is defined as the leakage of one eye's image into the image of the other eye. All popular commercial stereoscopic systems suffer from crosstalk to some extent. Studies show that crosstalk causes distortions, reduces image quality and visual comfort, and increases perceived workload. Moreover, there is evidence that crosstalk effects depth perception from disparity. In the present paper we present two experiments. The first addresses the effect of crosstalk on the perceived magnitude of depth from disparity. The second examines the effect of crosstalk on the magnitude of depth perceived from monocular occlusions. Our data show that crosstalk has a detrimental effect on depth perceived from both cues, but it has a stronger effect on depth from monocular occlusions. Our findings taken together with previous results suggest that crosstalk, even in modest amounts, noticeably degrades the quality of stereoscopic images.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 it