umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Object learning improves feature extraction but does not improve feature selection
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Department of Computer Science, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
2012 (English)In: PLoS ONE, ISSN 1932-6203, E-ISSN 1932-6203, Vol. 7, no 12, e51325- p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

A single glance at your crowded desk is enough to locate your favorite cup. But finding an unfamiliar object requires more effort. This superiority in recognition performance for learned objects has at least two possible sources. For familiar objects observers might: 1) select more informative image locations upon which to fixate their eyes, or 2) extract more information from a given eye fixation. To test these possibilities, we had observers localize fragmented objects embedded in dense displays of random contour fragments. Eight participants searched for objects in 600 images while their eye movements were recorded in three daily sessions. Performance improved as subjects trained with the objects: The number of fixations required to find an object decreased by 64% across the 3 sessions. An ideal observer model that included measures of fragment confusability was used to calculate the information available from a single fixation. Comparing human performance to the model suggested that across sessions information extraction at each eye fixation increased markedly, by an amount roughly equal to the extra information that would be extracted following a 100% increase in functional field of view. Selection of fixation locations, on the other hand, did not improve with practice.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Public library of science , 2012. Vol. 7, no 12, e51325- p.
National Category
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-66421DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051325ISI: 000313236200090OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-66421DiVA: diva2:607092
Available from: 2013-02-21 Created: 2013-02-19 Last updated: 2017-12-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1374 kB)80 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1374 kBChecksum SHA-512
d768e0c842e7eacd6abee9bc0c5d05505b87186bcf016cfc6ff9eac3e5705817124c372695af3eb570e9a8da65ae1e32ac2413d03c110b67be4145cc58473f0d
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Holm, Linus
By organisation
Department of Psychology
In the same journal
PLoS ONE
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 80 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 66 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf