Cargando…
Heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models
Human observers can perceive their direction of heading with a precision of about a degree. Several computational models of the processes underpinning the perception of heading have been proposed. In the present study we set out to assess which of four candidate models best captured human performanc...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3689323/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23801946 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00053 |
_version_ | 1782274253621559296 |
---|---|
author | Foulkes, Andrew J. Rushton, Simon K. Warren, Paul A. |
author_facet | Foulkes, Andrew J. Rushton, Simon K. Warren, Paul A. |
author_sort | Foulkes, Andrew J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Human observers can perceive their direction of heading with a precision of about a degree. Several computational models of the processes underpinning the perception of heading have been proposed. In the present study we set out to assess which of four candidate models best captured human performance; the four models we selected reflected key differences in terms of approach and methods to modelling optic flow processing to recover movement parameters. We first generated a performance profile for human observers by measuring how performance changed as we systematically manipulated both the quantity (number of dots in the stimulus per frame) and quality (amount of 2D directional noise) of the flow field information. We then generated comparable performance profiles for the four candidate models. Models varied markedly in terms of both their performance and similarity to human data. To formally assess the match between the models and human performance we regressed the output of each of the four models against human performance data. We were able to rule out two models that produced very different performance profiles to human observers. The remaining two shared some similarities with human performance profiles in terms of the magnitude and pattern of thresholds. However none of the models tested could capture all aspect of the human data. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3689323 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36893232013-06-25 Heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models Foulkes, Andrew J. Rushton, Simon K. Warren, Paul A. Front Behav Neurosci Neuroscience Human observers can perceive their direction of heading with a precision of about a degree. Several computational models of the processes underpinning the perception of heading have been proposed. In the present study we set out to assess which of four candidate models best captured human performance; the four models we selected reflected key differences in terms of approach and methods to modelling optic flow processing to recover movement parameters. We first generated a performance profile for human observers by measuring how performance changed as we systematically manipulated both the quantity (number of dots in the stimulus per frame) and quality (amount of 2D directional noise) of the flow field information. We then generated comparable performance profiles for the four candidate models. Models varied markedly in terms of both their performance and similarity to human data. To formally assess the match between the models and human performance we regressed the output of each of the four models against human performance data. We were able to rule out two models that produced very different performance profiles to human observers. The remaining two shared some similarities with human performance profiles in terms of the magnitude and pattern of thresholds. However none of the models tested could capture all aspect of the human data. Frontiers Media S.A. 2013-06-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3689323/ /pubmed/23801946 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00053 Text en Copyright © 2013 Foulkes, Rushton and Warren. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and subject to any copyright notices concerning any third-party graphics etc. |
spellingShingle | Neuroscience Foulkes, Andrew J. Rushton, Simon K. Warren, Paul A. Heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models |
title | Heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models |
title_full | Heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models |
title_fullStr | Heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models |
title_full_unstemmed | Heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models |
title_short | Heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models |
title_sort | heading recovery from optic flow: comparing performance of humans and computational models |
topic | Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3689323/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23801946 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00053 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT foulkesandrewj headingrecoveryfromopticflowcomparingperformanceofhumansandcomputationalmodels AT rushtonsimonk headingrecoveryfromopticflowcomparingperformanceofhumansandcomputationalmodels AT warrenpaula headingrecoveryfromopticflowcomparingperformanceofhumansandcomputationalmodels |