1 / 23

Experience Dependent Object Perception

Experience Dependent Object Perception. Richard Zemel Computer Science Department University of Toronto. Two Sets of Experiments. 1. To what degree is object perception invariant? Familiarity Naming Reference-Frames. . 2. What is the role of experience in completion?

liz
Télécharger la présentation

Experience Dependent Object Perception

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Experience Dependent Object Perception Richard Zemel Computer Science Department University of Toronto

  2. Two Sets of Experiments 1. To what degree is object perception invariant? Familiarity Naming Reference-Frames .2. What is the role of experience in completion? Novel occluded shapes Occlusion without occluders

  3. Collaborators • Mary Peterson • Larry James • Dave Towers • Marlene Behrmann • Mike Mozer • Daphne Bevalier

  4. Sample Stimuli

  5. Familiarity: Methods • Training Phase: 16 stimuli, fixed locations • passive viewing (6 blocks) • active: old/new discrimination (2 blocks) • [repeat] • Testing Phase (2 blocks) • new trials -- 16 distractors • old trials -- half of learned objects: • stay in learned location • shift to diagonally-opposite location

  6. Familiarity: Accuracy

  7. Familiarity: RT

  8. Naming: Methods • Training Phase [8 rounds]: 8 named objects • passive [2 blocks]: (160 ms) GIX(500 ms) • active [1 block]: (160 ms) keyboard (feedback) • Testing Phase [6 rounds]: half shift sides, half stay • passive [2 blocks] • active [1 block]: (no feedback)

  9. Naming: Accuracy

  10. Reference-Frames: Variations

  11. Reference-Frames: Methods • Training Phase [2 rounds]: 16 objects • passive [6 blocks]: • active [2 blocks]: old/new(f-back) • Testing Phase: same/different retinal & screen locs • active [2 blocks]: old-new

  12. Reference-Frames: Conditions

  13. Reference-Frames: Results

  14. Experience Dependence When Objects Irrelevant? • Many properties of objects not invariant, but rather depend on experience • Evidence from experiments in which object memory directly relevant to task • Is experience important when the object is unnecessary to accomplish task?

  15. Object attention & occlusion

  16. Object attention sensitive to layout

  17. Object attention & experience

  18. Experience affects object attention

  19. Completion without occluder? Subjects complete fragments given experience with potential linking shape: Is evidence of occlusion required?

  20. Completion w/o occluder: Methods • Phase 1: Ends displays • Phase 2: V displays • Phase 3: Ends and Vs

  21. Missing Occluder: Results

  22. Conclusions • Memories of novel objects are specific to learned locations • Both retinal & screen coordinates involved, so not just episodic memory • Object attention applies to recently viewed novel shapes • Experience-dependent object effects can apply to fragments without occluder

  23. Current Directions • Duration of effects • Generalization • Amount of experience required

More Related