The red primaries in most color spaces, including wide-ish stuff like DCI-P3 is around 615. Even Rec 2020 is just 630.
https://clarkvision.com/articles/color-spaces/
Note that it's fairly common to see chromaticity diagrams labelled with wavelengths around the edges, so you can check multiple sources if you want.
I didn't read the original article in sufficient depth to tell you if the researchers even know what 615nm would do, but it's not 670nm anyhow ;-).
Incidentally, the linked article also includes measured spectral responses for a few wide gamut screens, some of which have at least some response near 670nm. The most extreme on that page was the Del 3007WFP-HC LED, which peaked at 653, and has a wide peak hitting well over 700nm too (but below 650 too). A 2019 model Samsung Q80R qled TV (perhaps more common), had a peak at 632 nm, and at 670nm is about 20% as bright as at its peak.
(d) How much does the precise wavelength matter? The study used 670nm but also mentions the range 650-1000nm. Lots of red-light gadgets are available on Amazon but how do you verify the wavelength? I was thinking of an optical spectrum analyzer[1] but at $28,000 they are shockingly expensive. Even with raw LEDs bought from a reliable electronics distributor like Digi-Key, it would be nice to be able to measure it somehow.
[1] https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=52...
Or make your own? It'll probably be good enough https://publiclab.org/w/spectrometry
ThorLabs also sell cheaper spectrometers by the way. You don't need a spectrum analyser with seven significant figures! https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=34...
You can also get light testing devices used for film/industrial illumination https://www.sekonic.com/color-meter/c700 (about 1.5-2k)
Or even single chip spectrometers with broad 20nm resolution from Hamamatsu (about £400 on group gets). https://groupgets.com/manufacturers/hamamatsu-photonics/prod...
[1] https://is-instruments.com/products/miniature-spectrometer/
You can use a OSA, but yes they are expensive. Spectrometers are typically cheaper, but still expensive (you could go to a university optics group and ask them if they could measure it for you). That said if you buy from a reputable source you should get the right wavelength.
If you are trying this out be careful with the brightness.
https://www.avantes.com/products/spectrometers/compactline/i...
You can get them used for below 1000$, eg this listing:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Avantes-Compactline-Avaspec-Mini-/3...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_spectrum#/media/File:...
Just select one that has the one you are looking for, it's going to be cheaper and easier than getting an expensive or inaccurate spectrometer.
For instance, this classic one is at 660nm:
(b) unlikely, monitors work by essentially filtering out undesired colors from white light. I don't believe that >650nm light is within the color gammut of monitors. That's quite a long wavelength and close to infrared. To give you an indication, the Helium Neon lasers which used to be very common in schools etc for laser demonstrations have a wavelength of 632nm. Even if the monitor could display this, the brightness would likely not be strong enough.
(c) Could be, but it might be quite annoying to do.
I'm going to give this a try!
I got it for use with a telescope for looking operating a telescope without losing night vision.
#ff0000
Per https://academo.org/demos/wavelength-to-colour-relationship/
i don't know how precise it should be..
(a) Does this study sound plausible?
(b) Would staring at the correct red color on a monitor work? Or would that not work since monitor colors are generated by mixing R, G, and B pixels and therefore not a pure wavelength?
(c) Would it be reasonable methodology to test one eye to see if it improves over the other eye?