74
Psy 260 Announcements All late CogLab Assignment #1’s due today CogLab #2 (Attention) is due Thurs. 9/21 at the beginning of class Coglab booklets and disks--along with a printer that usually works--are available for use in the Psychology Resource Room (enter through Psych B 120) Quiz alert!

Psy 260 Announcements

  • Upload
    javier

  • View
    32

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Psy 260 Announcements. All late CogLab Assignment #1’s due today CogLab #2 (Attention) is due Thurs. 9/21 at the beginning of class Coglab booklets and disks--along with a printer that usually works--are available for use in the Psychology Resource Room (enter through Psych B 120) Quiz alert!. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Psy 260 Announcements

Psy 260 Announcements

All late CogLab Assignment #1’s due today CogLab #2 (Attention) is due Thurs. 9/21 at

the beginning of class Coglab booklets and disks--along with a

printer that usually works--are available for use in the Psychology Resource Room (enter through Psych B 120)

Quiz alert!

Page 2: Psy 260 Announcements

Neural network models

Nodes - processing units used to abstractly represent elements such as features, letters, and words

Links, or connections between nodes Activation - excitation or inhibition that

spreads from one node to another

Page 3: Psy 260 Announcements

Word superiority effect, revisited

Page 4: Psy 260 Announcements

Cond. 1: Cond. 2: Cond. 3:

WORD ORWD D

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Test: Which one did you see?

K K K

D D D

Word superiority effect, revisited

Page 5: Psy 260 Announcements

Word superiority effect, revisited

Word level

Letter level

Feature level

Input

See Reed, p. 36

Page 6: Psy 260 Announcements

Word superiority effect: An interactive activation model

WORK

K

| / \

Input: K or WORK or ORWDSee Reed, p. 36

Page 7: Psy 260 Announcements

Interactive Activation Model of the word superiority effect (McClelland & Rumelhart, 1981)

Page 8: Psy 260 Announcements

Interactive Activation Model of the word superiority effect (McClelland & Rumelhart, 1981)

Page 9: Psy 260 Announcements

(Email example of mangled text!!)

Page 10: Psy 260 Announcements

James Cattell, 1886: Word superiority effect (Reicher, 1969; Cattell, 1886)

Subjects recognized flashed words more accurately than flashed letters.

He proposed a word shape model.

Page 11: Psy 260 Announcements

Evidence for word shape model:

Word superiority effect Lowercase text is read faster than uppercase. Proofreading errors tend to be consistent

with word shape.

Page 12: Psy 260 Announcements

Evidence for word shape model:

Word superiority effect Lowercase text is read faster than uppercase. Proofreading errors tend to be consistent

with word shape. It’S dIfFiCuLt To ReAd WoRdS iN

aLtErNaTiNg CaSe.

Page 13: Psy 260 Announcements

Perception and Pattern Recognition III:

Faces

Page 14: Psy 260 Announcements

How do people recognize faces? Consider these types of theories:

Template theories Feature theories Structure theories Prototype theories

Page 15: Psy 260 Announcements

Feature theories

Patterns are represented in memory by their parts.

In perception, the parts are first recognized and then assembled into a meaningful pattern.

Piecemeal (as opposed to holistic)

Page 16: Psy 260 Announcements

What are the distinctive features for faces ?

Eyes, nose, mouth - NOT!

Page 17: Psy 260 Announcements

What are the distinctive features for faces ?

Eyes, nose, mouth - NOT!

Revisit Eleanor Gibson’s criteria: Each feature should be present in some patterns and

absent in others A feature should be invariant (unchanged) for all

instances of a particular pattern Each pattern has a unique combination of features The number of features should be fairly small

A set of features is evaluated by how well it can predict perceptual confusions.

Page 18: Psy 260 Announcements

Who are these people? Same or different?

Page 19: Psy 260 Announcements

Who are these people? Same or different?

Page 20: Psy 260 Announcements

Inspiration: Caricatures

“More like the face than the face itself” What are the distinctive features of a

face - say, Richard Nixon’s??? Ski jump nose Jowly face Curly-textured hair Receding bays in hairline Boxy chin (David Perkins, 1975)

Page 21: Psy 260 Announcements

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

A B C

D E F

Contraindicated features: Worse than missing features (Perkins, 1975)

Page 22: Psy 260 Announcements

Revisit: Problems w/ feature theories

How to determine the right set of features?

What about the relationships between features?

What if all the features are present in the pattern, but scrambled?

Features theories predict: No problem!

(and that’s the problem.)

Page 23: Psy 260 Announcements

Face recognition is holistic

(Tanaka & Farah, 1993)

Page 24: Psy 260 Announcements

Structure theories

Build on feature theories Patterns are represented in memory by

features AND by the relations between them.

Holistic The context of the pattern plays an

important role in pattern recognition.

Page 25: Psy 260 Announcements

A structure theory: RBC (Biederman)

Recognition by Components Geons: simple volumes (~35 of them) Construct objects by combining geons

Page 26: Psy 260 Announcements

RBC Theory

Analyze an object into geons Determine relations among the geons The relation among geons is critical!

Page 27: Psy 260 Announcements

RBC Theory

It’s hard to recognize an object without the information about relations among geons.

Hard!

Page 28: Psy 260 Announcements

RBC Theory

It’s hard to recognize an object without the information about relations among geons.

Easier!

Page 29: Psy 260 Announcements

RBC Theory

Basic properties of Geons View invariance Discriminability Resistance to visual noise

Page 30: Psy 260 Announcements

RBC Theory - Problems

Explains how people distinguish categories of objects (types) - like cups vs. briefcases. But how do people distinguish individual objects (tokens) that come from the same category (like faces)??

Neurons are to tuned respond to much smaller elements than those represented by geons!

Page 31: Psy 260 Announcements

Recap so far:

Theory: What it explains:

Template Bar codes (by machines)

Feature Letter learning & confusions

Structural Biederman’s data (geons)

Prototype

Page 32: Psy 260 Announcements

Face recognition (Piecemeal or holistic?)

(A “special” case of pattern recognition?)

Page 33: Psy 260 Announcements

We see faces everywhere.

Image from

Mars’ surface

by Viking Orbiter 1

(Mcneill, 1998, p. 5)

Page 34: Psy 260 Announcements

Are faces “special”?

How many faces can you recognize?

Page 35: Psy 260 Announcements

Are faces “special”?

How many faces can you recognize? Gibson: Patterns are easier to encode

as faces than as writing

Page 36: Psy 260 Announcements

Are faces “special”?

How many faces can you recognize? Gibson: Patterns are easier to encode

as faces than as writing

Page 37: Psy 260 Announcements

Faces vs. writing

Page 38: Psy 260 Announcements

Are faces “special”?

How many faces can you recognize? Gibson: Patterns are easier to encode

as faces than as writing Prosopagnosia

Page 39: Psy 260 Announcements

We don’t need much information to recognize a familiar face.

Guess who?

Page 40: Psy 260 Announcements

We don’t need much information to recognize a familiar face.

Guess who?

Page 41: Psy 260 Announcements

Why is face recognition so interesting?

It’s important! Faces are highly similar to one another. Yet we’re really good at it: we can tell an

astounding number of faces apart. Not all facial information is created equal. Could machines ever do as well as people?

Or even better? Are faces somehow “special”?

Page 42: Psy 260 Announcements

Why is face recognition so interesting?

It’s important! Faces are highly similar to one another. Yet we’re really good at it: we can tell an

astounding number of faces apart. Not all facial information is created equal. Could machines ever do as well as people?

Or even better? Are faces somehow “special”?

Page 43: Psy 260 Announcements

Faces are hard to recognize in photographic negative

(Galper & Hochberg, 1971)

Page 44: Psy 260 Announcements

Faces are hard to recognize upside down (Yin, 1969)

Page 45: Psy 260 Announcements

Faces are hard to recognize upside down (Yin, 1969)

“Early processing in the recognition of faces”

http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/2003/35/Kap4.pdf

Page 46: Psy 260 Announcements

Faces are hard to recognize upside down (Yin, 1969)

“Early processing in the recognition of faces”

http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/2003/35/Kap4.pdf

Page 47: Psy 260 Announcements

Margaret Thatcher effect

(Thomson, 1980)

Page 48: Psy 260 Announcements

Margaret Thatcher effect

(Thomson, 1980)

Page 49: Psy 260 Announcements

Why?

The configural processing hypothesis:

When faces are inverted, the relationships among features are disturbed.

So we don’t notice the odd configuration in the Thatcher illusion.

(Bartlett & Searcy, 1993)

Page 50: Psy 260 Announcements

Faces are hard to recognize upside down (Yin, 1969)

“Early processing in the recognition of faces”

http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/2003/35/Kap4.pdf

Page 51: Psy 260 Announcements
Page 52: Psy 260 Announcements

What kind of theory accounts for face recognition?

Theory: Objection:

Template Different lighting, orientation,

motion, hair, glasses, age

Feature What is a facial “feature”?

Invariant vs. transient features

Structural

Prototype

Page 53: Psy 260 Announcements

Familiar vs. unfamiliar faces

“Attribute Checking Theory” A feature theory For familiar faces, internal features seem

to be more important than outside features. For new faces, we pay more attention to

outside features (hair, face shape, etc.)

(Bradshaw & Wallace)

Page 54: Psy 260 Announcements

Familiar vs. unfamiliar faces

“Early processing in the recognition of faces”

http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/2003/35/Kap3.pdf

Page 55: Psy 260 Announcements

Children recognize faces differently than adults do.

Children under 10 use transient features to distinguish unfamiliar faces. Strangers wearing the same hat seem

similar, and are confusable.

(Susan Carey)

Page 56: Psy 260 Announcements

What makes faces confusable?

(Harmon, 1973)

Page 57: Psy 260 Announcements
Page 58: Psy 260 Announcements
Page 59: Psy 260 Announcements

Application: Face recognition by eyewitnesses

Page 60: Psy 260 Announcements

Problem:

Identikit: piecemeal, featural Photo methods: Introduce interference, bias Lineup: when the perpetrator is not present,

20-40% of witnesses select someone anyway. With photos and lineups, witnesses compare

the suspects and choose the most similar one False convictions often have eyewitness

testimony as the strongest evidence in the

Page 61: Psy 260 Announcements

The right way to do a lineup:

“Showup” - view suspects or pictures one at a time, ideally only once

If multiple viewings, then view each one the same number of times, always in random order (avoid between-suspect comparisons)

The one showing the faces must be blind to whom law enforcement believes suspect is

(Otherwise, impossible to avoid bias) Then false IDs drop to 10%.

Page 62: Psy 260 Announcements

Mistaken identity!

Page 63: Psy 260 Announcements

What about a structural theory of face recognition?

Pro: The relationships between features are very important.

Pro: We often fail to recognize a familiar face when we see it out of context.

Con: A structural theory doesn’t explain how we can distinguish so many highly similar, individual tokens.

(Moving right along: A prototype theory

Page 64: Psy 260 Announcements

What is a caricature?

An exaggerated representation of a face More like a face than the face itself!

The Caricature Generator (Brennan, 1982)

Page 65: Psy 260 Announcements

The average (prototype) face

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Page 66: Psy 260 Announcements

Veridical (traced) drawing

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Page 67: Psy 260 Announcements

Veridical (traced) drawing

Ronald Reagan

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Page 68: Psy 260 Announcements

A prototype theory of face recognition

When drawings were recognized, caricatures were faster than veridical drawings, which were faster than “anti-caricatures.”

Average face 0 distortion Caricature

(Rhodes, Brennan, & Carey, 1987)

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Page 69: Psy 260 Announcements

50% Caricature

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Page 70: Psy 260 Announcements

Caricatures

&

Anti-Caricatures

For a face,maybe we encodethe difference froma prototype.

Page 71: Psy 260 Announcements

Face Space

Page 72: Psy 260 Announcements

What kind of theory accounts for face recognition?

Theory: Objection:

Template Different lighting, orientation, motion, hair, glasses, age

Feature What is a facial “feature”?Invariant vs. transient features

Structural Faces are highly similar tokenswith the same structure!

Prototype This works! (but maybe not for unfamiliar faces and not

for kids)

Page 73: Psy 260 Announcements

Is face recognition “special”?

No! There are other classes of patterns for

which people can distinguish huge numbers of individuals (tokens). Ornithologists recognize individual birds New England Kennel Club judges

recognize individual dogs There is even prosopagnosia for things

other than faces!

Page 74: Psy 260 Announcements

Some sources

George Lovell’s slides from Roth & Brucehttp://www.face-rec.org/interesting-papers/Other/FaceRecognition.pdf

“Early processing in the recognition of faces”http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/2003/35/Kap3.pdf

Harmon, L. D. (1973). The recognition of faces. Scientific American, 229(5), 71-82.