MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138028713 · doi:10.1145/2010324.1964958

Color compatibility from large datasets

2011· article· en· W3138028713 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHueComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceColor modelCompatibility (geochemistry)Theme (computing)Color spaceSet (abstract data type)Computer visionImage (mathematics)World Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies color compatibility theories using large datasets, and develops new tools for choosing colors. There are three parts to this work. First, using on-line datasets, we test new and existing theories of human color preferences. For example, we test whether certain hues or hue templates may be preferred by viewers. Second, we learn quantitative models that score the quality of a five-color set of colors, called a color theme . Such models can be used to rate the quality of a new color theme. Third, we demonstrate simple proto-types that apply a learned model to tasks in color design, including improving existing themes and extracting themes from 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.002

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.220 · 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