But that is going to take a long time, so not ideal for a lab setting.
Absolute pitch is easier to recognize in life, because people who possess it can name a pitch completely out of the blue, and of pretty much anything, like a sneeze, door slam, not just piano tones.
So, there are three traits of AP --- which I gathered anecdotally, not scientifically --- that I think that might help to distinguish AP from a good RP.
1. AP works on anything with a stable, audible frequency. Memorizing the sound cannot provide that. (e.g. I cannot tell the frequency of a door slam, even though I can tune a violin without a tuner.) So, potentially, the test would use the type of sound they didn't train with.
2. AP also works really fast. As soon as they hear the sound, they know the pitch. No time for calculation. So, the subject should be asked to answer immediately.
3. People with AP doesn't seem to make mistakes at all.
All of these have led me to believe that AP is not a skill of adeptness. It's like they perceive sounds in a fundamentally different manner than I do, as if there is a separate mapping of frequency in their brain.
Again, this comment is based on my experience with people who have absolute pitch. I don't have a background in neuroscience to understand how AP works precisely, or to state definitively that the traits I described are universal among people with AP.
1. They consciously use relative pitch from a known reference tone when identifying another pitch "out of the blue", and
2. They have worked hard on acquiring relative pitch, which is something one consciously practises.
In practise, spacing the tests out more than a day and asking subjects not to listen for other things between tests might help, without being foolproof.
How might a test be designed to take that into account?