Using Rational Models to Interpret the Results of Experiments on Accent Adaptation

Exposure to unfamiliar non-native speech tends to improve comprehension. One hypothesis holds that listeners adapt to non-native-accented speech through distributional learning—by inferring the statistics of the talker's phonetic cues. Models based on this hypothesis provide a good fit to incremental changes after exposure to atypical native speech. These models have, however, not previously been applied to non-native accents, which typically differ from native speech in many dimensions. Motivated by a seeming failure to replicate a well-replicated finding from accent adaptation, we use ideal observers to test whether our results can be understood solely based on the statistics of the relevant cue distributions in the native- and non-native-accented speech. The simple computational model we use for this purpose can be used predictively by other researchers working on similar questions. All code and data are shared.

Why are the batteries in the microwave?: Use of semantic information under uncertainty in a search task

A major problem in human cognition is to understand how newly acquired information and long-standing beliefs about the environment combine to make decisions and plan behaviors. Over-dependence on long-standing beliefs may be a significant source of suboptimal decision-making in unusual circumstances. While the contribution of long-standing beliefs about the environment to search in real-world scenes is well-studied, less is known about how new evidence informs search decisions, and it is unclear whether the two sources of information are used together optimally to guide search. The present study expanded on the literature on semantic guidance in visual search by modeling a Bayesian ideal observer’s use of long-standing semantic beliefs and recent experience in an active search task. The ability to adjust expectations to the task environment was simulated using the Bayesian ideal observer, and subjects’ performance was compared to ideal observers that depended on prior knowledge and recent experience to varying degrees. Target locations were either congruent with scene semantics, incongruent with what would be expected from scene semantics, or random. Half of the subjects were able to learn to search for the target in incongruent locations over repeated experimental sessions when it was optimal to do so. These results suggest that searchers can learn to prioritize recent experience over knowledge of scenes in a near-optimal fashion when it is beneficial to do so, as long as the evidence from recent experience was learnable.

Stereo Slant Discrimination of Planar 3D Surfaces: Standard vs. Planar Cross-Correlation

Binocular stereo cues are important for discriminating 3D surface orientation, especially at near distances. We devised a single-interval task where observers discriminated the slant of a densely textured planar test surface relative to a textured planar surround reference surface. Although surfaces were rendered with correct perspective, the stimuli were designed so that the binocular cues dominated performance. Slant discrimination performance was measured as a function of the reference slant and the level of uncorrelated white noise added to the test-plane images in the left and right eye. We compared human performance with an approximate ideal observer (planar cross correlation, PCC) and two sub-ideal observers. The PCC observer uses the image in one eye and back projection to predict the test image in the other eye for all possible slants, tilts, and distances. The estimated slant, tilt, and distance are determined by the prediction that most closely matches the measured image in the other eye. The first sub-ideal observer (local PCC, LPCC) applies planar cross correlation over local neighborhoods and then pools estimates across the test plane. The second sub-optimal observer (standard cross correlation, SCC), uses only positional disparity information. We find that the ideal observer (PCC) and the first sub-ideal observer (LPCC) outperform the second sub-ideal observer (SCC), demonstrating the benefits of structural disparities. We also find that all three model observers can account for human performance, if two free parameters are included: a fixed small level of internal estimation noise, and a fixed overall efficiency scalar on slant discriminability.PrecisWe measured human stereo slant discrimination thresholds for accurately-rendered textured surfaces designed so that performance is dominated by binocular-disparity cues. We compared human performance with an approximate ideal observer and two sub-ideal observers.

Image-Computable Ideal Observers for Tasks with Natural Stimuli

An ideal observer is a theoretical model observer that performs a specific sensory-perceptual task optimally, making the best possible use of the available information given physical and biological constraints. An image-computable ideal observer (pixels in, estimates out) is a particularly powerful type of ideal observer that explicitly models the flow of visual information from the stimulus-encoding process to the eventual decoding of a sensory-perceptual estimate. Image-computable ideal observer analyses underlie some of the most important results in vision science. However, most of what we know from ideal observers about visual processing and performance derives from relatively simple tasks and relatively simple stimuli. This review describes recent efforts to develop image-computable ideal observers for a range of tasks with natural stimuli and shows how these observers can be used to predict and understand perceptual and neurophysiological performance. The reviewed results establish principled links among models of neural coding, computational methods for dimensionality reduction, and sensory-perceptual performance in tasks with natural stimuli.

Performance of normative and approximate evidence accumulation on the dynamic clicks task

The aim of a number of psychophysics tasks is to uncover how mammals make decisions in a world that is in flux. Here we examine the characteristics of ideal and near–ideal observers in a task of this type. We ask when and how performance depends on task parameters and design, and, in turn, what observer performance tells us about their decision-making process. In the dynamic clicks task subjects hear two streams (left and right) of Poisson clicks with different rates. Subjects are rewarded when they correctly identify the side with the higher rate, as this side switches unpredictably. We show that a reduced set of task parameters defines regions in parameter space in which optimal, but not near-optimal observers, maintain constant response accuracy. We also show that for a range of task parameters an approximate normative model must be finely tuned to reach near-optimal performance, illustrating a potential way to distinguish between normative models and their approximations. In addition, we show that using the negative log-likelihood and the 0/1-loss functions to fit these types of models is not equivalent: the 0/1-loss leads to a bias in parameter recovery that increases with sensory noise. These findings suggest ways to tease apart models that are hard to distinguish when tuned exactly, and point to general pitfalls in experimental design, model fitting, and interpretation of the resulting data.

Do people ask good questions?

People ask questions in order to efficiently learn about the world. But do people ask good questions? In this work, we designed an intuitive, game-based task that allowed people to ask natural language questions to resolve their uncertainty. Question quality was measured through Bayesian ideal-observer models that considered large spaces of possible game states. During free-form question generation, participants asked a creative variety of useful and goal-directed questions, yet they rarely asked the best questions as identified by the Bayesian ideal-observers (Experiment 1). In subsequent experiments, participants strongly preferred the best questions when evaluating questions that they did not generate themselves (Experiments 2 & 3). On the one hand, our results show that people can accurately evaluate question quality, even when the set of questions is diverse and an ideal-observer analysis has large computational requirements. On the other hand, people have a limited ability to synthesize maximally-informative questions from scratch, suggesting a bottleneck in the question asking process.