Trial reportJournal of vision2019
Computational-observer analysis of illumination discrimination.
Trial report in Journal of vision, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- An image-computable spatio-chromatic receptive field model of the midget retinal ganglion cell mosaic across the retina.Journal of computational neuroscience · 2026Article
- Deep neural networks trained for estimating reflectance and illumination achieve lightness constancy differently than human observers.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Color constancy for daylight illumination changes in anomalous trichromats and dichromats.Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision · 2023Article
- Fluctuating environmental light limits number of surfaces visually recognizable by colour.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Modeling visual performance differences 'around' the visual field: A computational observer approach.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- Illumination discrimination for chromatically biased illuminations: Implications for color constancy.Journal of vision · 2019Article
- Illumination discrimination in the absence of a fixed surface-reflectance layout.Journal of vision · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The spectral properties of the ambient illumination provide useful information about time of day and weather. We study the perceptual representation of illumination by analyzing measurements of how well people discriminate between illuminations across scene configurations. More specifically, we compare human performance to a computational-observer analysis that evaluates the information available in the isomerizations of cone photopigment in a model human photoreceptor mosaic. The performance of such an observer is limited by the Poisson variability of the number of isomerizations in each cone. The overall level of Poisson-limited computational-observer sensitivity exceeded that of human observers. This was modeled by increasing the amount of noise in the number of isomerizations of each cone. The additional noise brought the overall level of performance of the computational observer into the same range as that of human observers, allowing us to compare the pattern of sensitivity across stimulus manipulations. Key patterns of human performance were not accounted for by the computational observer. In particular, neither the elevation of illumination-discrimination thresholds for illuminant changes in a blue color direction (when thresholds are expressed in CIELUV ΔE units), nor the effects of varying the ensemble of surfaces in the scenes being viewed, could be accounted for by variation in the information available in the cone isomerizations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.