{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.040566037735849055, 'fraction_numerical': 0.027358490566037737, 'mean_word_length': 4.704301075268817, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Efficiency of the human observer for detecting a Gaussian signal at a known location in non-Gaussian distributed lumpy backgrounds.

A previous study [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A22, 3 (2005)] has shown that human efficiency for detecting a Gaussian signal at a known location in non-Gaussian distributed lumpy backgrounds is approximately 4%. This human efficiency is much less than the reported 40% efficiency that has been documented for Gaussian-distributed lumpy backgrounds [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A16, 694 (1999) and J. Opt. Soc. Am. A18, 473 (2001)]. We conducted a psychophysical study with a number of changes, specifically in display-device calibration and data scaling, from the design of the aforementioned study. Human efficiency relative to the ideal observer was found again to be approximately 5%. Our variance analysis indicates that neither scaling nor display made a statistically significant difference in human performance for the task. We conclude that the non-Gaussian distributed lumpy background is a major factor in our low human-efficiency results.