Effect of crosstalk on depth magnitude in thin structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stereoscopic displays must present separate images to the viewer's left and right eyes. Crosstalk is the unwanted contamination of one eye's image from the image of the other eye. It has been shown to cause distortions, reduce visual comfort, and increase perceived workload during the performance of visual tasks. Crosstalk also affects one's ability to perceive stereoscopic depth although little consideration has been given to the perception of depth magnitude in the presence of crosstalk. We extend a previous study (Tsirlin, Allison, and Wilcox, 2011) on the perception of depth magnitude in stereoscopic occluding and non-occluding surfaces to the special case of crosstalk in thin structures. We use a paradigm in which observers estimated the perceived depth difference between two thin vertical bars using a measurement scale. Our data show that as crosstalk levels increase, the magnitude of perceived depth decreases, especially for stimuli with larger relative disparities. In contrast to the effect of crosstalk on depth magnitude in larger objects, in thin structures a significant detrimental effect has been found at all disparities. Our findings, when considered with the other perceptual consequences of crosstalk, suggest that its presence in S3D media, even in modest amounts, will reduce observers' satisfaction.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".