Evaluating the Visibility of Architectural Features for People with Low Vision – A Quantitative Approach

References

• [ANSI/IES] American National Standards Institute/Illuminating Engineering Society. 2016. ANSI/IES RP-28-16. Lighting and the visual environment for seniors and the low vision population. New York (NY): The Illuminating Engineering Society. p. 128.
   Google Scholar
• [ANSI-IES] American National Standards Institute/Illuminating Engineering Society. 2018. Recommended practice for design and maintenance of roadway and parking facility lighting. New York (NY): Illuminating Engineering Society.
   Google Scholar
• Barrow HG, Tenenbaum JM, Bolles RC, Wolf HC. 1977. Parametric correspondence and chamfer matching: two new techniques for image matching. IJCAI’77 Proc 5th Joint Conf Artif Intel. 2(2):659–663.
   Google Scholar
• Bourne RRA, Flaxman SR, Braithwaite T, Cicinelli MV, Das A, Jonas JB, Keeffe J, Kempen JH, Leasher J, Limburg H, et al. 2017. Magnitude, temporal trends, and projections of the global prevalence of blindness and distance and near vision impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 5(9):E888–E897. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30293-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell FW, Robson JG. 1968. Application of fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings. J Physiol. 197(3):551–566. doi:https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1968.sp008574.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canny JF. 1986. A computational approach to edge detection. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 8:679–698. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.1986.4767851.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter B (2018). Measuring the detection of objects under simulated visual impairment in 3D rendered scenes [Ph.D. Thesis]. University of Minnesota. https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/201710.
   Google Scholar
• Chan T, Friedman DS, Bradley C, Massof R. 2018. Estimates of incidence and prevalence of visual impairment, low vision, and blindness in the United States. JAMA Ophthalmol. 136(1):12–19. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.4655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colenbrander A. 2003. Aspects of vision loss – visual functions and functional vision. Vis Impair Res. 5(3):115–136. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/1388235039048919.
   Google Scholar
• [NIBS] National Institute of Building Sciences. 2015. Design guidelines for the visual environment. National Institute of Building Sciences. Accessed at https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/LVDC/LVDP_Guidelines_052815.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Felzenszwalb PE, Huttenlocher DP. 2012. Distance transforms of sampled functions. Theory Comput. 8:415–428. doi:https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2012.v008a019.
   Google Scholar
• Fleck MF. 1992. Some defects in finite-difference edge finders. IEEE Trans Pa. 14(3):337–345. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/34.120328.
   Google Scholar
• Groundhog. 2017. Groundhog lighting. [accessed 2018 Aug 15]. http://www.groundhoglighting.com.
   Google Scholar
• Grynberg A. 1989. Validation of radiance, LBID 1575. Berkeley (CA): LBL Technical Information Department Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.
   Google Scholar
• Odell NV, Leske DA, Hatt SR, Adams WE, Holmes JM. 2008. The effect of Bangerter filters on optotype acuity, Vernier acuity, and contrast sensitivity. J Aapos. 12(6):555–559. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2008.04.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peli E. 1990. Contrast in complex images. J Opt Soc Am A. 7(10):2032–2040. doi:https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.7.002032.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pelli DG, Robson JG, Wilkins AJ. 1988. The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clin Vision Sci. 2:187–199.
   Google Scholar
• Rea MS. 1986. Toward a model of visual performance: foundations and data. J Illum Eng Soc. 15(2):41–57. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00994480.1986.10748655.
   Google Scholar
• Rea MS, Ouellette MJ. 1991. Relative visual performance: a basis for application. Light Res Techno. 23(3):135–144. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/096032719102300301.
   Google Scholar
• Rockcastle S, Andersen M. 2014. Measuring the dynamics of contrast & daylight variability in architecture: a proof-of-concept methodology. Build Environ. 81:320–333. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.06.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson WB, Legge GE, Kersten DJ, Shakespeare RA, Lei Q. 2017. Simulating visibility under reduced acuity and contrast sensitivity. J Opt Soc Am A 34(4):583–593. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.34.000583
   Google Scholar
• Van Den Wymelenberg K, Inanici M. 2016. Evaluating a new suite of luminance-based design metrics for predicting human visual comfort in offices with daylight. LEUKOS. 12(3):113–138. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2015.1062392.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward GJ. 1994. The RADIANCE lighting simulation and rendering system. In Proceedings of the 21st annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. p. 459–472.
   Google Scholar
• Ward GJ, Shakespeare R. 1998. Rendering with radiance: the art and science of lighting visualization. San Francisco (CA): Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Wienold J, Christoffersen J. 2006. Evaluation methods and development of a new glare prediction model for daylight environments with the use of CCD cameras. Energy Build. 38(7):743–757. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.03.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaikina V, Matusiak BS, Klöckner CA. 2015. Luminance-based measures of shape and detail distinctness of 3D objects as important predictors of light modeling concept. Results of a full-scale study pairing proposed measures with subjective responses. LEUKOS. 11(4):193–207. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2015.1024848.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar