Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sons and mothers: classification of colour-deficient and heterozygous subjects by counterphase modulation photometry

Jordan, G., Mollon, J. D.·1997·Documenta Ophthalmologica Proceedings Series
DOI 10.1007/978-94-011-5408-6_42
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-94-011-5408-6_42

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 20 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Adam A. (1969). Foveal red-green ratios of normals, colourblinds and heterozygotes. Proc Tel-Hashomer Hosp. Israel 8: 2–6
  2. Mollon J.D. (1987). On the nature of models of colour vision. Die Farbe 34: 29–46
  3. Schiötz I. (1920). Rotgrunblindheit als Erbeigenschaft. Klin. Monatsbl. Augenheilkd. 68: 498–526
  4. Schmidt I. (1934). Über manifeste Heterozygotie bei Konduktorinnen fur FarbsinnstÖrungen. Klin. Monatsbl. Augenheilkd. 92: 456–467
  5. Zisman F, Seger K.R. and Adams A.J. (1987). Specificity evaluation of the OSCAR colour vision test. In: Verriest G. (ed.), Colour Vision Deficiencies VIII, Doc. Ophthal. Proc. Ser. 46: 173–176. Martinus NijhofF, W. Junk, Dordrecht

Cited by

See all 3

Metadata

Authors
Jordan, G., & Mollon, J. D.
Venue
Documenta Ophthalmologica Proceedings Series
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published
1997
Pages
385-392
ISSN
0303-6405
DOI
10.1007/978-94-011-5408-6_42
Cited by
3
References
20

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sons and mothers: classification of colour-deficient and heterozygous subjects by counterphase modulation photometry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/978-94-011-5408-6_42
The paper
Jordan, G., & Mollon, J. D. (1997). Sons and mothers: classification of colour-deficient and heterozygous subjects by counterphase modulation photometry. Documenta Ophthalmologica Proceedings Series. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5408-6_42

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.