MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560216520 · doi:10.1117/1.jei.26.1.011014

Chromatic modulation in visual art: a computational perspective

2016· article· en· W2560216520 on OpenAlexaff
Anissa Agahchen, Alexandra Branzan Albu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Electronic Imaging · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAesthetic Perception and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuePalette (painting)Color spacePaintingComputer sciencePerspective (graphical)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionChromatic scaleColor visionColor imageMonochromatic colorLightnessRGB color modelFalse colorColor balanceFocus (optics)Computer graphics (images)ArtMathematicsImage processingImage (mathematics)Visual artsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a computational approach for analyzing and visualizing the aesthetics of color from the perspective of color theory. Our study is grounded in the works of Johannes Itten, one of the most remarkable theorists of color aesthetics. Our focus lies on the computational analysis of a specific aspect of color usage in paintings, namely modulation. We, therefore, propose the three-dimensional (3-D) color palette, a visualization of the chromatic information of an image in the hue-saturation-lightness space. Using the proposed palette, we derive a set of simple hue-specific descriptors for color modulation. Our experimental results involve a selection of digital reproductions of paintings discussed extensively by Itten. They show that the proposed modulation measures yield results that are consistent with Itten’s comments and explanations. Future work involves further exploration of the proposed 3-D color palette, in terms of its ability to discriminate between different artists and painting styles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Electronic ImagingSame topicAesthetic Perception and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207