model observers
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

91
(FIVE YEARS 13)

H-INDEX

17
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (04) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel A. Lago ◽  
Craig K. Abbey ◽  
Miguel P. Eckstein

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heiko Herbert Schütt ◽  
Aspen Yoo ◽  
Joshua Michael Calder-Travis ◽  
Wei Ji Ma

Bayesian optimal inference is often heralded as a principled, general framework for human perception. However, optimal inference requires integration over all possible world states, which quickly becomes intractable in complex real-world settings. Additionally, deviations from optimal inference have been observed in human decisions. As a candidate alternative framework to address these issues, we propose point estimate observers, which evaluate only a single best estimate of the world state per response category. We compare the predicted behavior of these model observers to human decisions in five perceptual categorisation tasks. Compared to the Bayesian observer, the point estimate observer loses decisively in one task, ties in two and wins in two tasks. Thus, the point estimate observer is competitive with the Bayesian observer and should be considered in future model development and experimental studies.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Can Oluk ◽  
Kathryn Bonnen ◽  
Johannes Burge ◽  
Lawrence K. Cormack ◽  
Wilson S. Geisler

AbstractBinocular 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.


Author(s):  
Jian Li ◽  
Kunpeng Pan ◽  
Qingyu Su

The main purpose of this article is to study the sensor fault isolation for DC-DC converters, taking the single-ended primary industry converter as an example. To achieve the purpose of the research, we model the DC-DC converters as switched affine systems and design a bank of sliding mode observers for each corresponding sensor fault. By comparing the threshold with the residual estimation function produced by each sliding model observers, we can diagnose which sensor faults are occurring. Finally, three sensor faults are given as simulation examples to verify the feasibility of the proposed scheme.


Author(s):  
Fenglei Fan ◽  
Sangtae Ahn ◽  
Bruno De Man ◽  
Kristen A. Wangerin ◽  
Scott D. Wollenweber ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Miguel A. Lago ◽  
Craig K. Abbey ◽  
Miguel P. Eckstein

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 ◽  
pp. 89-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaele Villa ◽  
Nicoletta Paruccini ◽  
Antonia Baglivi ◽  
Michele Signoriello ◽  
Roberto Alejandro Montezuma Velasquez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon M. Locke ◽  
Elon Gaffin-Cahn ◽  
Nadia Hosseinizaveh ◽  
Pascal Mamassian ◽  
Michael S. Landy

1AbstractPriors and payoffs are known to affect perceptual decision-making, but little is understood about how they influence confidence judgments. For optimal perceptual decision-making, both priors and payoffs should be considered when selecting a response. However, for confidence to reflect the probability of being correct in a perceptual decision, priors should affect confidence but payoffs should not. To experimentally test whether human observers follow this normative behavior, we conducted an orientation-discrimination task with varied priors and payoffs, probing both perceptual and metacognitive decision-making. We then examined the placement of discrimination and confidence criteria according to several plausible Signal Detection Theory models. In the normative model, observers use the optimal discrimination criterion (i.e., the criterion that maximizes expected gain) and confidence criteria that shift with the discrimination criterion that maximizes accuracy (i.e., are not affected by payoffs). No observer was consistent with this model, with the majority exhibiting non-normative confidence behavior. One subset of observers ignored both priors and payoffs for confidence, always fixing the confidence criteria around the neutral discrimination criterion. The other group of observers incorrectly incorporated payoffs into their confidence by always shifting their confidence criteria with the same gains-maximizing criterion used for discrimination. Such metacognitive mistakes could have negative consequences outside the laboratory setting, particularly when priors or payoffs are not matched for all the possible decision alternatives.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document