Effective Visualization of Radar Data for Users Impacted by Color Vision Deficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Color vision deficiency (CVD) is a decreased ability to discern between particular colors. Eight percent of genetic males and half a percent of genetic females have some form of CVD, with many in the radar community falling into this group. When presenting data on a two-dimensional plane, it is common to use colors to represent values via a colormap. Colormap choice in the radar community is influenced by the ability to highlight scientifically interesting features in data, institutional choices, and domain dominance of legacy colormaps. The problem with these current colormaps is that many do not project well for those with CVD (i.e., green next to red). In working with the CVD community to address this problem, multiple colormaps for moments such as equivalent reflectivity factor and Doppler velocity were created for users with forms of CVD such as deuteranomaly, protanomaly, protanopia, and deuteranopia using Python tools such as colorspacious and viscm. We show how these colormaps can improve interpretability for four cases: a mesoscale convective system, a pyrocumulonimbus storm, a wintertime midlatitude cyclone, and widespread storms with a large bird migration. These new radar equivalent reflectivity factor, Doppler velocity, and polarization colormaps are designed to highlight rain, frozen precipitation, nonmeteorological targets, and velocity-based items, are perceptually uniform, and are visually friendly for those with CVD.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.006 |
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".