DFT Category-10 Candidate Comparison

Status: draft Scope: compare current DFT and five candidate category-10 palettes against the two strongest reference leaders Source: Reference Categorical Palette Corpus, Economist and Apache ECharts Case Study

This note compares DFT candidate palettes against The Economist and Apache ECharts, which emerged as the strongest structural leaders in the reference corpus. The goal is to learn from their robustness without copying their brighter red-led styling.

Population-informed vision weights used here:

• normal: 1.0
• deuteranopia: 1.0
• protanopia: 1.0
• tritanopia: 0.15

• achromatopsia: 0.05

• Comparison PNG

• Comparison CSV

Step-5 Summary

• The Economist: step 5 0.5%, full set 7.2%, weakest full-set ΔE 0.3
• Apache ECharts: step 5 0.6%, full set 6.5%, weakest full-set ΔE 0.4
• DFT Candidate E: step 5 0.9%, full set 7.3%, weakest full-set ΔE 0.1
• DFT Candidate D: step 5 1.4%, full set 10.0%, weakest full-set ΔE 0.1
• DFT Current: step 5 4.1%, full set 12.3%, weakest full-set ΔE 0.0
• DFT Candidate A: step 5 4.4%, full set 7.3%, weakest full-set ΔE 0.1
• DFT Candidate B: step 5 4.4%, full set 7.3%, weakest full-set ΔE 0.1
• DFT Candidate C: step 5 11.2%, full set 10.2%, weakest full-set ΔE 0.1