EXPERIMENT ON SUBJECTIVE EVALUATION OF LUMINOUS ENVIRONMENT OF A LIVING ROOM WITH VARIOUS ARRANGEMENTS OF SMALL ELECTRIC LIGHTS WITH COMPACT SELF-BALLASTED FLUORESCENT LAMP AND DIFFERENT LIGHT SOURCE COLOR IN DAYTIME AND NIGHTTIME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to clarify the relation between subjective evaluation and luminous environment by arrangements of small electric light and colors of light source in daytime and nighttime. A subjective experiment was carried out using a mockup living room with a window surrounded by the artificial sky dome which can simulate the overcast sky. The result was shown as follows. 1) Small electric lights were not very needed under high artificial sky brightness condition, at least 1100cd/m2. 2) Location of lights on the ceiling influences the visibility under low artificial sky brightness condition, 100cd/m2. On the contrary, difference between a wall luminaire and a downlight does not influence the visibility. In addition, the arrangement of small electric lights improves the lighting quality and reduces electricity consumption for lighting. 3) Warm white color (2800K) light from the small electric light is more popular than the neutral white color (5000K) light under low artificial sky brightness, 330cd/m2.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".