ArticleJournal of vision2025
The visibility of Eidolon distortions in things and stuff.
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The visibility of alterations to the physical structure of images (distortions) depends on the image content and on viewing conditions. Here we measure human sensitivity to a class of image distortions, Eidolons, applied to image sets containing a range of content, from object images or scenes, to textures and materials. In an odd-one-out task with peripherally presented images, we replicate previous findings that distortions are harder to detect in images which contain large regions of texture or material and fewer segmentable object boundaries. Next, we reason that an image-computable model able to capture the critical aspects of encoding transformations should be able to predict the discriminability of distortion-image pairs, irrespective of image content. We therefore test a variety of image-computable models, treating them as perceptual metrics, using a simple hierarchical regression framework. Of the tested models, the texture statistics of the Portilla and Simoncelli model best predicted performance, beating simple Fourier-spectrum-based transforms and a biologically inspired LGN statistics model. There remains, however, a substantial gap between the best single image-computable metric and an oracle model that has information about the experimental parameters and image labels. This work compliments existing datasets in image distortion discriminability and image quality, and extends existing frameworks for comparatively evaluating the predictive performance of perceptual metrics.
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.