MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280610424 · doi:10.1364/oe.456067

Adapting to an enhanced color gamut – implications for color vision and color deficiencies

2022· article· en· W4280610424 on OpenAlexaff
Ivana Ilić, Kassandra R. Lee, Yoko Mizokami, Lorne Whitehead, Michael A. Webster

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsGamutColor visionColor gelChromatic adaptationOpticsContrast (vision)Spectral colorColor spaceComputer visionComputer scienceColor constancyArtificial intelligenceColor filter arrayColor differenceLightnessFilter (signal processing)RGB color modelPerceptionColor balanceAdaptation (eye)Color modelPhysicsColor imageImage processingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One strategy for aiding color deficiencies is to use three narrow passbands to filter the light spectrum to increase the saturation of colors. This filtering is analogous to the narrow emission bands used in wide gamut lighting or displays. We examined how perception adapts to the greater color gamut area produced by such devices, testing color-normal observers and simulated environments. Narrowband spectra increased chromatic contrasts but also increased contrast adaptation, partially offsetting the perceived contrast enhancements. Such adaptation adjustments are important for understanding the perceptual consequences of exposure to naturally or artificially enhanced color gamut areas for both color-deficient and color-normal observers.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207