Spectral Characteristics of Sports and Occupational Tinted Lenses
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tinted spectacle lenses are used for a variety of reasons including comfort, reduction of glare, enhanced vision under certain conditions, cosmesis, status for the wearer, and protection from radiation and/or impact. The selection of tints for protection from hazardous levels of optical radiation in industry and other work environments is well documented and governed by various standards. However, the selection of tinted lenses for other uses is usually arbitrary and made without professional advice. The purchaser often chooses tinted lenses on the basis of advertising material provided by the manufacturer. Few manufacturers provide accurate lens transmittance data, and some make claims which cannot be substantiated. We have previously reported on tinted prescription spectacle lenses and contact lens materials. However, the majority of tinted lenses worn for sports and occupational purposes do not fall into these categories. Thus, the object of this study was to evaluate the absorptive characteristics of a variety of special-purpose non-prescription tinted lenses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it