Color perception : philosophical, psychological, artistic, and computational perspectives
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
Colour has been studied for centuries, but remains incompletely understood. Digital technology has recently sparked a burgeoning inter-disciplinary interest in colour. Graphic artists prefer to create their images on computers even though colours seen on display look different when printed; galleries now digitally archive valuable work. The fundamental problem that arises is that colour reproduction is not simply a matter of reproducing identical phenomenona, but is rather a matter of creating perceptual equivalencies. The fact that colour is a of perception rather than a physical quality brings up a host of interesting questions and makes it of common interest to both artists and scholars. This interdisciplinary volume - the ninth in the Vancouver Studies in Cognitive Science series - brings together chapters by psychologists, philosophers, computer scientists and artists to explore the nature of human colour perception, and hopes to further our understanding of colour by encouraging interdisciplinary interaction.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.259 | 0.011 |
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