Convergence — where it appears
Named by 37 essays across 8 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
An extremum is not a sample
Three separate measurements in this collection took a maximum or a minimum over a sample of a set — forty-eight points round an ellipse, twenty-four directions out of an optimum, fourteen changes of light off a list. All three are wrong, all three are wrong in the same direction, and the error in each grows with the very quantity being measured.
Three numbers for one ellipse
How far a colour space is from making a discrimination contour circular has three different answers — what a coarse sample of the boundary reports, what a converged sample of a contour of stated size reports, and what the map's own derivative says. They differ by up to a factor of two, they mean different things, and only one of them is what the question is asking.
A width nobody varied
Five numbers say how much people differ from one another, and every conclusion drawn here about a population rests on them. Each was written down with the range the literature reports beside it, so that a result could be re-read at the pessimistic end. Nothing ever was.
How wrong would the data have to be
Twenty-five ellipses measured on one observer in 1942 are the ruler every colour space here is judged against, and they have never been given an error. Rather than invent one, the question is turned round, and asks how large an error would have to be before the ranking changed.
Twenty-five is a sample of the diagram
A colour space's uniformity score is the mean of twenty-five numbers, and a mean of twenty-five numbers has a standard error those twenty-five numbers determine. Nothing has to be quoted to compute it, and three of the seven adjacent pairs in this collection's ranking survive it.
How far a quadratic can be believed
A second-order model has a radius inside which it describes a surface and outside which it does not, and that radius can be measured. Measured at eight places on one objective, it is smallest at the optimum — the one place anybody ever takes a Hessian.
What would have to be wrong
A great many statements here have thresholds written into them, which turns out to make an audit possible — for each one, the smallest change in a declared input that would stop it holding. Most are unreachable. One is inside a factor of one and a third.
A lattice is a quadrature rule
Walking a set of test surfaces more finely does not converge on a better answer, because refining a lattice under a constraint changes which corners of the region get sampled and not only how densely. The lattice used here turns out to be a two per cent biased estimate of the integral it stands for.
An extremum is still not a sample
Two rounds ago three measurements turned up that took a maximum over a sample of a set and were short by up to a factor of two. The same error was live in a fourth place the whole time, on the set of surfaces every adaptation number is averaged over, and it is short by up to a third.
A finer reading of a coarser table
Interpolating a five-nanometre spectrum to one nanometre helps a daylight calculation by a factor of five and harms a three-emitter LED by a factor of a hundred and twenty thousand. Both are the same operation on the same table, and which one happens is decided by a property of the light nobody records.
Where the grid starts
Holding the step at five nanometres and sliding the grid's origin through one cell moves a fluorescent tube's computed colour by 3.18 ΔE₀₀ and a laser projector's by 35.0. Refining the step does not fix it and averaging over origins hides it. It is the one tabulation fault with no smooth error to cancel against.
The endpoint term has a name
The five-nanometre error on a smooth light falls linearly with the step, which is not what a sampling error does. It is the half-cell at each end of a truncated range, it is first order where the sampling is second, and halving two weights removes fourteen fifteenths of it for nothing.
The reference had to be built
A five-nanometre error cannot be measured with five-nanometre data. Interpolating the tables and integrating finely measures the interpolator, not the grid — so the audit of this collection's index had to be run against an observer made of formulae, and the price of that is a residual of 1.42 ΔE₀₀ that every number in the section is read beside.
Thirty unknowns instead of six
A directional transport solver is worth nothing until it reproduces the one it replaces. Setting every wall's bidirectional distribution to ρ over π collapses thirty ordered-pair radiances onto six radiosities and reproduces this collection's existing answer to 9.8 × 10⁻¹⁶ relative — which is the only reason anything else it says can be believed.
Where a patch stops being a point
A patch in a cube subtends a cone of 25.8° at the face opposite. A microfacet lobe of roughness 0.05 is about three degrees wide. Point-sampling the second inside the first returned a chroma of thirty-four thousand and a negative lightness, and the boundary between working and not working is measured rather than declared.
What this round could not reach
Three audits, about twenty departures and ten conditions, and a longer list of things that were named and not measured. Every item on it is specific, most of them are an afternoon's work, and the reason none was done is the same in every case — the round ran out of round.
The straight piece under the cube root
CIELAB's lightness is described everywhere as a cube root and below a stated luminance it is a straight line, spliced on with two constants chosen so the join is exact in value and in slope. Every black a delivery chain reaches is inside that straight piece — a press black at L* 2.4, a projected black at 1.1 — where the compression does not compress, the price of a deviation is flat to two parts in a thousand, and the second derivative the composition of two departures needs does not exist.
Where the model's curve does not matter
This round has been about what a nonlinearity does to an average, and CIECAM16 is the most nonlinear thing in the collection. Over the spread a population of observers produces, the average of its predictions is its prediction for the average to within 1.4 per cent — the nonlinearity is there and the excursion is too small to reach it. Over the range of adapting luminance one room covers in a day, the same gap is 59 per cent of the spread, and from indoors to outdoors 74.
A second conversion is not a repeat
A colour converted to a device and back is described as lossy where the device cannot hold it and exact where it can, which suggests that a colour surviving one round trip survives any number. One of the four intents is idempotent to the floating-point floor. The other two are not — a perceptual conversion moves a ramp 3.70 colour differences on its first pass and another 2.73 on its second, and after three passes it is still moving by 2.42.
A distance raised to a power has no length
CAM16-UCS's colour difference is its Euclidean distance raised to the power 0.63 and multiplied by 1.41. That is still a metric — the triangle inequality holds on every one of four thousand random triples — and it has no length. A grey ramp from black to white measures 25 units in one step, 137 in a hundred and 755 in ten thousand, growing as the number of steps to the power 0.37, and halving the size of a step triples the number of steps that fit.
The boundary belongs to the quadrature
The directional solver stops at a roughness of about 0.15, and below that its answers are not imprecise but unphysical. The boundary is where the lobe stops being resolved by the sampling, so it belongs to the discretisation rather than to the room — and moving it is a purchase. Measured across six quadratures the reachable roughness falls as the cost to the power of a third, so a finish twice as glossy costs seven times the work and a polished varnish costs two hundred and thirty-six times.
A projection has no reason to detour
Holding a gradient inside a press by penalising the excursion turned the gamut's price from a number into a search: on five of ten crossing gradients some starting point leaves the relaxation trapped at more than twice the free length, and the spread across six starts runs to 271 per cent of the free path. Replacing the penalty with a projection — take the free step, then move each point to the nearest printable colour — leaves no trap on any gradient and a spread of 0.06 to 2.4 per cent.
The tall room gains once its walls are divided
The room census solves each face as one patch, and it says a satin finish on the grey faces of a tall room with painted side walls makes the room more colourful for none of seventy-two paints. The true box disagreed: rays from points on the grey end walls said the finish sends the lamp's light towards the paint. Dividing every face into patches settles it. The end wall's upper patches, which see the lamp at a grazing slant, send its light across to the painted walls; its lower patches send it to the floor. The room gains for 0, 4, 8, 11, 15 and 15 paints as the faces are divided one to six times a side — the light, broad paints — and the narrow slot beside it goes from 22 to all 72.
Divided faces keep the census's count and lose its rule
The painted-room census, solved with one patch a face, found that a satin finish on a room's grey faces adds colour in 28 of 30 rooms, and a later essay found one geometric number whose sign sorted which rooms gain. Re-solved with every face divided into twenty-five or thirty-six patches, the count survives exactly — 28 rooms, though two of them trade places — and the finish colours every paint in 17 rooms instead of 13. The rule does not: the send number, now matching the true box's own to a rank correlation of 0.96, orders the divided counts at 0.63, and rooms on the wrong side of its zero gain for every paint. Nine of the thirty counts move by twenty paints or more.
The paint's own light does not order the rooms
A satin finish on a room's grey faces colours some paint in 28 of the painted census's 30 rooms, and the number meant to say which rooms gain most — how much of the lamp's light the finish sends to the paint — orders the rooms solved on divided faces at only 0.63. The rooms it misplaced return mostly the paint's own light, so the proposal was to count that instead. Counted, the paint's light orders the rooms at −0.07. In every room with its floor painted the finish sends the floor's light away from the floor, and every paint gains; with the ceiling painted the paint is the lamp and the two numbers are the same number. Even the room's own response, read off the solve with the paint in place, orders the counts only at 0.71. The census has to be solved room by room.
The slot's loss survives every finer division
Read on the painted faces alone, a satin finish on a room's grey faces makes the paint more colourful in twenty-eight of the painted census's thirty rooms and less colourful in two: the tall narrow slot with its floor painted and with its ceiling painted, where the paint loses about a twentieth of a per cent of its chroma. A loss that small could belong to how finely the slot's faces were divided, and the prediction was that it does not — that the sign holds at seven and eight strips a side. It holds. Solved from one strip a side to eight, the slot's paint gains at one, two and three strips and loses from four on, every one of seventy-two paints crossing at the same division; the loss deepens at every finer division, to −0.055 and −0.059 per cent at eight strips, and run out to no strip width it settles near −0.058 and −0.065. The coarse census had the sign wrong; the census at six strips had it right. The bright, broad paints lose most, as they gained most everywhere else.
The finish stops costing the paint six tenths deep
In the tall narrow slot a satin finish on the grey faces costs a painted floor or ceiling a little of its chroma; in the tall room, the same box a full unit deep, it adds some. Solved at eight depths between, the sign turns at 0.62 of the box's width with the floor painted and at 0.63 with the ceiling — later than the prediction of 0.45 to 0.55, and far enough along that the loss belongs to a range of shallow boxes rather than to the slot alone. A finer division moves the turn a little deeper, not back. Every one of seventy-two paints turns at the same depth, and each paint's share of the change is the same at every depth, loss or gain. Brightness does not decide it: the finish brightens the painted floor by between half and more than double while hardly touching the painted ceiling, yet the two turn together. What decides it is which reflectance the finish favours — whether it multiplies the light that has been back to the paint by more or by less than the light that has never touched it.
A taller box must be deeper before the finish adds colour
In a box one unit wide and two and a half tall, a satin finish on the grey faces costs a painted floor a little of its chroma when the box is shallower than 0.62 of its width and adds some when it is deeper. Whether that turn is set by the width or by the height was the open question, and the prediction was that it scales with the height, because the satin walls pipe the lamp down to the floor and a taller box is a longer pipe. It does, and faster than in proportion. A box 1.5 tall gains at every depth from 0.35 and turns shallower than that; a box 4 tall loses at every depth to half again its width and turns near 1.67. As a share of the height the turn rises from about 0.17 to 0.25 to 0.42 — close to a depth growing as the square of the height. The taller box pipes far more of the lamp to the floor, tripling its light at 0.35 deep, and at every depth of every box the paint's colour still follows which reflectance the finish favours. Six strips a side keep both new boxes' signs.
The width moves the turn only when it is the narrower side
In a box one unit wide and two and a half tall, a satin finish on the grey faces costs a painted floor a little chroma when the box is shallower than about 0.64 and adds some when it is deeper. The prediction was that the width hardly matters — that the two end walls a depth apart form the pipe that carries the lamp down, and wider walls only add more of it — so the turn would move by under a tenth between widths. Solved at six strips a side, a box two units wide turns between 0.5 and 0.65, within the tenth or so predicted. A box half a unit wide still loses at 1.5 deep, and its quarter-turned twin says it still loses at 2: its turn is more than a unit and a quarter deeper. With only the floor painted a box w wide and d deep is the box d wide and w deep, so depth and width are one question, and the answer is that the floor's shorter side decides: under about half a unit the finish greys the paint, past about 0.65 it colours it. The scan's first pass, at four strips, said otherwise, and got four of seven signs wrong in the long, thin boxes.
A square floor needs more room than a long one
A satin finish on a room's grey faces costs its painted floor a little chroma when the room is narrow and adds some when it is wide, and in a box two and a half tall the turn was found on the floor's shorter side — 0.64 when the longer side is one unit, about 0.51 when it is two. The prediction for a square floor, with no longer side to speak of, was a later turn, near 0.7, because both pairs of walls are then equally close and both carry the lamp down. Solved at six strips a side, the square floor loses for every one of seventy-two paints at 0.5, 0.6 and 0.7 on a side and gains for every one from 0.8, turning near 0.78. A floor 0.7 by 0.7 loses where a floor 0.7 by one gains. The finish brightens the square's darkest floor by more than an oblong's at every shorter side — by a hundred per cent against forty-six at half a unit — and the turn falls steadily as the longer side grows: 0.78, 0.64, 0.51. The longer side matters, and the light-pipe account says why.
A long floor never loses its colour to the finish
A satin finish on a room's grey faces costs its painted floor a little chroma when the room is narrow, and the shorter side at which the cost turns into a gain fell as the floor grew longer — 0.78 for a square, 0.64 for a floor one unit long, 0.51 for two. The prediction was that it settles near 0.45 by four units, the limit of a slot whose far walls pipe nothing. Solved at six strips a side, floors three and four units long gain chroma for every one of seventy-two paints at every shorter side from 0.35 to 0.65: there is no turn to find. The floor two units long already loses only in a window, shorter sides from about 0.3 to just past 0.5, and gains on either side of it; by three units the window has closed, and a four-unit floor gains more than a three-unit one everywhere. The loss was never the slot's. It belonged to the far pair of walls, and moving them away removes it.
The window of loss closes from both ends
A satin finish on a room's grey faces costs a painted floor a little chroma only in narrow rooms near square, and a floor two units long loses it only in a window of shorter sides, from about 0.30 to 0.51, while a floor three units long never does. The prediction for the floor two and a half units long was that the window closes from below: a gain at a shorter side of 0.3 and a loss only near 0.4 to 0.5, because the lower edge is where the far walls' pipe is weakest. The floor gains at 0.3, loses at 0.4 — by under six thousandths of a per cent — and gains again at 0.5. The window closes from both ends at once, to 0.39–0.42, and its deepest point rises through nought near 2.6 units long. Every box is still all or nothing, every one of seventy-two paints with the same verdict, and every verdict has the sign of the finish's tilt across the floor's reflectance. The far walls' cost shrinks smoothly with their distance and centres on a shorter side of about 0.4.
A taller room keeps its floor losing in proportion
A satin finish on a room's grey faces nearly always adds a little colour to a painted floor, and in a box 2.5 units tall it takes some away only in a pocket of proportions: floors shorter than about 2.6 units, with a shorter side near 0.4. The prediction was that the pocket scales with the room's height — that a box four units tall keeps losing until its floor is about 4.2 units long, 1.04 times its height as in the lower box. It loses until 4.04 units, 1.01 times its height: the crossing scales, a little short of the prediction. The pocket moves too. At a shorter side of 0.4, where the lower box lost, the taller box's floor gains at every length; its losses sit at 0.6 — at three and four units long — and at 0.8 when three units long, and its deepest loss lies near a sixth of its height, as the lower box's did. Every box is still all or nothing across seventy-two paints, and every box's change carries the sign of its finish's tilt across reflectance.
A room scaled whole loses its floor to the last digit
A satin finish on a room's grey faces costs a painted floor a little of its chroma only in a pocket of proportions, and a box four units tall was found losing in proportion to a box 2.5 tall — its crossing at 1.01 times its height against the lower box's 1.04, its pocket near a sixth of the height in both. The prediction was that the answer is the room's proportions alone: that the four-tall box built as the 2.5-tall box multiplied by 1.6 gives the lower box's loss to the solver's precision, and that the floor four units long loses from about 0.55 to 0.65 wide. The scaled box gives the lower box's numbers to eleven significant figures, and a pair the census had already solved agrees to twelve. The window sits higher than predicted at both edges, from 0.59 to 0.70. And the gap between the two rooms' crossings was the census's sampling: read at the pocket, the taller room crosses at 1.029 times its height against 1.036.
The wedge of loss comes to a point
A satin finish on a room's grey walls and ceiling adds colour to a painted floor in almost every proportion of room, and costs it a few thousandths of a per cent of its chroma in one narrow wedge of proportions: floors about as long as the room is tall and a sixth of its height wide. The wedge was known to close between floors 1.0 and 1.2 times the height long. The prediction was that a floor 1.04 times the height long still loses at a sixth of the height and one 1.08 times as long gains at every width near it, placing the tip between them a little above the coarse crossing of 1.036. The longer floor gains everywhere, as predicted. The 1.04 floor sits on the tip itself: its change in chroma is two parts in ten million, the row crosses nought at 1.0399, and there — and in no other box of the census — the seventy-two paints part company, fifty-five gaining and seventeen losing.
The pale paints cross the tip last
A satin finish on a room's grey faces costs a painted floor its chroma only in a narrow wedge of proportions, and at the wedge's tip — a floor 1.04 times the room's height long and a sixth of it wide — the mean change is nought and, alone in the census, the seventy-two paints part company: seventeen lose, fifty-five gain. The prediction was that the losers are the paints with the narrowest reflectance bands, whose chroma depends most on how much grey light mixes in, and that they lose most below the tip and gain least above it. The opposite holds. No narrow band loses; half the broadest do, and fourteen of the seventeen have the highest peak — the pale paints. They lose most below the tip and gain most above it: they are the paints the finish moves most, up to three times the mean, and each paint has its own tip, from 1.0387 to 1.0413 times the height, the palest last.
The pocket has a step where its bottom should be
Along a floor as long as the room is tall, a satin finish on the grey faces costs the floor a few thousandths of a per cent of its chroma in a pocket around a sixth of the height wide, deepest at 0.16 of the height by three samples a hundredth of the height apart. The prediction was that boxes between those samples trace one smooth dip with its bottom between 0.39 and 0.41 units, every box from 0.375 to 0.425 losing. The loss does deepen smoothly, at every step from 0.375 to 0.40. Then, a hundredth of a unit wider, at 0.41, every one of the seventy-two paints gains; at 0.42 they split; at 0.4375 every paint loses again. The row changes sign three times in a tenth of a unit of width, and the one step from 0.40 to 0.41 rises three times as fast as the pocket falls. The finish's brightening, which the chroma change rides on, falls smoothly straight through. What the census has called the pocket's bottom is a step.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Modelling assumptionSpecularInterreflectionRadiosityChromaSamplingQuadratureDeclared inputAnisotropyChromatic adaptationCIELABColour difference