MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Robust Chroma and Lightness Descriptors

2015· article· en· W2895228715 on OpenAlexaff
Hamidreza Mirzaei, Brian Funt

Bibliographic record

VenueColor and Imaging Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCategorization, perception, and language
Canadian institutionsBC StudiesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandard illuminantLightnessMathematicsArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New descriptors for lightness and chroma are presented that are based on properties of a wraparound Gaussian metameric to the given XYZ tristimulus coordinates. For the 1600 samples of the Munsell glossy set, both descriptors are found to correlate to Munsell value and chroma at least as well as the corresponding CIECAM02 descriptors when the Munsell samples are under the CIE C illuminant. However, when the illuminant is changed the new descriptors were found to be considerably more consistent under the second illuminant than those of CIECAM02.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueColor and Imaging ConferenceSame topicCategorization, perception, and languageFrench-language works237,207