MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101430149

Optimal visual search based on a model of target detectability in natural images

2020· article· en· W3101430149 on OpenAlexaff
Shima Rashidi, Krista A. Ehinger, Andrew Turpin, Lars Kulik

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Information Processing Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceVisual searchObserver (physics)Computer visionBayesian probabilityPattern recognition (psychology)Eye trackingPsychophysicsTarget acquisitionGround truthHuman visual system modelVisual perceptionMachine learningPerceptionImage (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To analyse visual systems, the concept of an ideal observer promises an optimal response for a given task. Bayesian ideal observers can provide optimal responses under uncertainty, if they are given the true distributions as input. In visual search tasks, prior studies have used signal to noise ratio (SNR) or psychophysics experiments to set the distributional parameters for simple targets on backgrounds with known patterns, however these methods do not easily translate to complex targets on natural scenes. Here, we develop a model of target detectability in natural images to estimate the parameters of target-present and target-absent distributions for a visual search task. We present a novel approach for approximating the foveated detectability of a known target in natural backgrounds based on biological aspects of human visual system. Our model considers both the uncertainty about target position and the visual system’s variability due to its reduced performance in the periphery compared to the fovea. Our automated prediction algorithm uses trained logistic regression as a post processing phase of a pre-trained deep neural network. Eye tracking data from 12 observers detecting targets on natural image backgrounds are used as ground truth to tune foveation parameters and evaluate the model, using cross-validation. Finally, the model of target detectability is used in a Bayesian ideal observer model of visual search, and compared to human search performance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural Information Processing SystemsSame topicVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFrench-language works237,207