Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Methodology-specific rayleigh-match distributions

Piantanida, Thomas P., Gille, Jennifer·1992·Vision Research
DOI 10.1016/0042-6989(92)90100-w
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0042-6989(92)90100-w

Cites

18 of 18 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 18 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. He, 1991, Inferring photopigments from Rayleigh matches, Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (Suppl.), 32, 1212
  2. Jordan, 1988, Two kinds of men?, Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (Suppl.), 29, 164
  3. Shevell, 1992, Variation in cone photopigments among men and among women, Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (Suppl.), 33, 700
  4. Waaler, 1975, Genetics and physiology of colour vision III, Del Norske Videnskaps-Akadamie I. No. 15

Cited by

See all 4

Metadata

Authors
Piantanida, T. P., & Gille, J.
Venue
Vision Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1992-12
Volume
32
Issue
12
Pages
2375-2377
ISSN
0042-6989
DOI
10.1016/0042-6989(92)90100-w
Cited by
4
References
18
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

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: Methodology-specific rayleigh-match distributions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0042-6989(92)90100-w
The paper
Piantanida, T. P., & Gille, J. (1992). Methodology-specific rayleigh-match distributions. Vision Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(92)90100-w

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.