- Analyzing vision at the complexity level.John K. Tsotsos -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):423-445.details
The general problem of visual search can be shown to be computationally intractable in a formal, complexity-theoretic sense, yet visual search is extensively involved in everyday perception, and biological systems manage to perform it remarkably well. Complexity level analysis may resolve this contradiction. Visual search can be reshaped into tractability through approximations and by optimizing the resources devoted to visual processing. Architectural constraints can be derived using the minimum cost principle to rule out a large class of potential solutions. The (...) evidence speaks strongly against bottom-up approaches to vision. In particular, the constraints suggest an attentional mechanism that exploits knowledge of the specific problem being solved. This analysis of visual search performance in terms of attentional influences on visual information processing and complexity satisfaction allows a large body of neurophysiological and psychological evidence to be tied together. (shrink)
| |
Representation is representation of similarities.Shimon Edelman -1998 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):449-467.detailsIntelligent systems are faced with the problem of securing a principled (ideally, veridical) relationship between the world and its internal representation. I propose a unified approach to visual representation, addressing both the needs of superordinate and basic-level categorization and of identification of specific instances of familiar categories. According to the proposed theory, a shape is represented by its similarity to a number of reference shapes, measured in a high-dimensional space of elementary features. This amounts to embedding the stimulus in a (...) low-dimensional proximal shape space. That space turns out to support representation of distal shape similarities which is veridical in the sense of Shepard's (1968) notion of second-order isomorphism (i.e., correspondence between distal and proximal similarities among shapes, rather than between distal shapes and their proximal representations). Furthermore, a general expression for similarity between two stimuli, based on comparisons to reference shapes, can be used to derive models of perceived similarity ranging from continuous, symmetric, and hierarchical, as in the multidimensional scaling models (Shepard, 1980), to discrete and non-hierarchical, as in the general contrast models (Tversky, 1977; Shepard and Arabie, 1979). (shrink) | |
| Similarity as transformation.Ulrike Hahn,Nick Chater &Lucy B. Richardson -2003 -Cognition 87 (1):1-32.details | |
| What's lost in inverted faces?Gillian Rhodes,Susan Brake &Anthony P. Atkinson -1993 -Cognition 47 (1):25-57.details | |
| Image-based object recognition in man, monkey and machine.Michael J. Tarr &Heinrich H. Bülthoff -1998 -Cognition 67 (1-2):1-20.details | |
Mental representation and the subjectivity of consciousness.Pete Mandik -2001 -Philosophical Psychology 14 (2):179-202.detailsMany have urged that the biggest obstacles to a physicalistic understanding of consciousness are the problems raised in connection with the subjectivity of consciousness. These problems are most acutely expressed in consideration of the knowledge argument against physicalism. I develop a novel account of the subjectivity of consciousness by explicating the ways in which mental representations may be perspectival. Crucial features of my account involve analogies between the representations involved in sensory experience and the ways in which pictorial representations exhibit (...) perspectives or points of view. I argue that the resultant account of subjectivity provides a basis for the strongest response physicalists can give to the knowledge argument. (shrink) | |
| The emergence of events.Judith Avrahami &Yaakov Kareev -1994 -Cognition 53 (3):239-261.details | |
Towards structural systematicity in distributed, statically bound visual representations.Shimon Edelman &Nathan Intrator -2003 -Cognitive Science 27 (1):73-109.detailsThe problem of representing the spatial structure of images, which arises in visual object processing, is commonly described using terminology borrowed from propositional theories of cognition, notably, the concept of compositionality. The classical propositional stance mandates representations composed of symbols, which stand for atomic or composite entities and enter into arbitrarily nested relationships. We argue that the main desiderata of a representational system—productivity and systematicity—can (indeed, for a number of reasons, should) be achieved without recourse to the classical, proposition‐like compositionality. (...) We show how this can be done, by describing a systematic and productive model of the representation of visual structure, which relies on static rather than dynamic binding and uses coarsely coded rather than atomic shape primitives. (shrink) No categories | |
| Three-dimensional object recognition based on the combination of views.Shimon Ullman -1998 -Cognition 67 (1-2):21-44.details | |
| Evidence accumulation in cell populations responsive to faces: an account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations.D. I. Perrett,M. W. Oram &E. Ashbridge -1998 -Cognition 67 (1-2):111-145.details | |
| Computational theories of object recognition.Shimon Edelman -1997 -Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1 (8):296-304.details | |
| Frames of reference in unilateral neglect and visual perception: A computational perspective.Michael C. Mozer -2002 -Psychological Review 109 (1):156-185.details | |
| Rating the similarity of simple perceptual stimuli: asymmetries induced by manipulating exposure frequency.Thad A. Polk,Charles Behensky,Richard Gonzalez &Edward E. Smith -2002 -Cognition 82 (3):B75-B88.details | |
Orientation-invariant object recognition: evidence from repetition blindness.Irina M. Harris &Paul E. Dux -2005 -Cognition 95 (1):73-93.detailsThe question of whether object recognition is orientation-invariant or orientation-dependent was investigated using a repetition blindness (RB) paradigm. In RB, the second occurrence of a repeated stimulus is less likely to be reported, compared to the occurrence of a different stimulus, if it occurs within a short time of the first presentation. This failure is usually interpreted as a difficulty in assigning two separate episodic tokens to the same visual type. Thus, RB can provide useful information about which representations are (...) treated as the same by the visual system. Two experiments tested whether RB occurs for repeated objects that were either in identical orientations, or differed by 30, 60, 90, or 180°. Significant RB was found for all orientation differences, consistent with the existence of orientation-invariant object representations. However, under some circumstances, RB was reduced or even eliminated when the repeated object was rotated by 180°, suggesting easier individuation of the repeated objects in this case. A third experiment confirmed that the upside-down orientation is processed more easily than other rotated orientations. The results indicate that, although object identity can be determined independently of orientation, orientation plays an important role in establishing distinct episodic representations of a repeated object, thus enabling one to report them as separate events. (shrink) | |
| A little complexity analysis goes a long way.John K. Tsotsos -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):458-469.details | |
| Orientation Invariance and Geometric Primitives in Shape Recognition.Martha J. Farah,Robin Rochlin &Karen L. Klein -1994 -Cognitive Science 18 (2):325-344.details | |
| The lemon illusion: seeing curvature where there is none.Lars Strother,Kyle W. Killebrew &Gideon P. Caplovitz -2015 -Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 9.details | |
| Attention to distinguishing features in object recognition: An interactive-iterative framework.Orit Baruch,Ruth Kimchi &Morris Goldsmith -2018 -Cognition 170 (C):228-244.details | |
| Localization and homing using combinations of model views.Ronen Basri &Ehud Rivlin -1995 -Artificial Intelligence 78 (1-2):327-354.details | |
| The theory and practice of attention.Kyle R. Cave -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):445-446.details | |
| Dissociating the effects of angular disparity and image similarity in mental rotation and object recognition.Olivia S. Cheung,William G. Hayward &Isabel Gauthier -2009 -Cognition 113 (1):128-133.details | |
| Complexity at the neuronal level.Robert Desimone -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):446-446.details | |
| Computation, complexity, and systems in nature.Bradley W. Dickinson -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):447-447.details | |
| Task-dependent constraints on perceptual architectures.Roy Eagleson -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):447-448.details | |
| What are the insights gained train the complexity analysis?Jan-Olof Eklundh -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):448-449.details | |
| View combination: A generalization mechanism for visual recognition.Alinda Friedman,David Waller,Tyler Thrash,Nathan Greenauer &Eric Hodgson -2011 -Cognition 119 (2):229-241.details | |
| Is unbounded visual search intractable?Andrew Heathcote &D. J. K. Mewhort -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):449-449.details | |
| Analyzing vision at the complexity level: Misplaced complexity?Lester E. Krueger &Chiou-Yueh Tsav -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):449-450.details | |
| Complexity is complicated.Paul R. Kube -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):450-451.details | |
| Developmental Commonalities between Object and Face Recognition in Adolescence.Martin Jüttner,Elley Wakui,Dean Petters &Jules Davidoff -2016 -Frontiers in Psychology 7.details | |
| Probability theory as an alternative to complexity.David G. Lowe -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):451-452.details | |
Objective Subjectivity: Allocentric and Egocentric Representations in Thought and Experience.Pete Mandik -2000 - Dissertation, Washington UniversitydetailsMany philosophical issues concern questions of objectivity and subjectivity. Of these questions, there are two kinds. The first considers whether something is objective or subjective; the second what it _means_ for something to be objective or subjective. | |
Points of view from the brain's eye view: Subjectivity and neural representation.Pete Mandik -2001 - In William P. Bechtel, Pete Mandik, Jennifer Mundale & Robert S. Stufflebeam,Philosophy and the Neurosciences: A Reader. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell. pp. 312.details Export citation Bookmark | |
| Support for an intermediate pictorial representation.Michael Mohnhaupt &Bernd Neumann -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):452-453.details | |
| Part-Based Segmentation and Modeling of Range Data by Moving Target.Roberto Pirrone -2001 -Journal of Intelligent Systems 11 (4):217-248.details | |
| Putting knowledge into a visual shape representation.Eric Saund -1992 -Artificial Intelligence 54 (1-2):71-119.details | |
Predicting ordinary objects into the world.Arthur C. Schwaninger -forthcoming -Philosophical Psychology.detailsOrdinary objects are experienced to endure over space and time, to not be collocated with each other, to be composed of proper parts, and to survive the loss of some of their parts. These qualities are on the one hand difficult to reconcile for theorists of perception and on the other hand pose a variety of problems when considered in isolation. Relying on the theoretical framework of predictive processing, this paper argues that we can use the category of a robust (...) predictive process to conceptualize qualities such as persistence and compositionality in a unified manner. Traditional problems concerning the structural properties of ordinary objects, such as the question of when two objects compose, can then be reformulated using this new category. (shrink) | |
| Is it really that complex? After all, there are no green elephants.Ralph M. Siegel -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):453-453.details | |
| Algorithmic complexity analysis does not apply to behaving organisms.Gary W. Strong -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):453-454.details | |
| Search and the detection and integration of features.Anne Treisman -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):454-455.details | |
| Some important constraints on complexity.Leonard Uhr -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):455-456.details | |
| On brains and models.William R. Uttal -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):456-457.details | |
| Complexity, guided search, and the data.Jeremy M. Wolfe -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):457-458.details | |
| Brain Processes While Struggling With Evidence Accumulation During Facial Emotion Recognition: An ERP Study.Yu-Fang Yang,Eric Brunet-Gouet,Mariana Burca,Emmanuel K. Kalunga &Michel-Ange Amorim -2020 -Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 14.details | |
| Adaptation and attention.Steven W. Zucker -1990 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):458-458.details | |
