评估认知模型中参数估计的信息价值。

Tom Verguts, Gert Storms
{"title":"评估认知模型中参数估计的信息价值。","authors":"Tom Verguts,&nbsp;Gert Storms","doi":"10.3758/bf03195544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mathematical models of cognition often contain unknown parameters whose values are estimated from the data. A question that generally receives little attention is how informative such estimates are. In a maximum likelihood framework, standard errors provide a measure of informativeness. Here, a standard error is interpreted as the standard deviation of the distribution of parameter estimates over multiple samples. A drawback to this interpretation is that the assumptions that are required for the maximum likelihood framework are very difficult to test and are not always met. However, at least in the cognitive science community, it appears to be not well known that standard error calculation also yields interpretable intervals outside the typical maximum likelihood framework. We describe and motivate this procedure and, in combination with graphical methods, apply it to two recent models of categorization: ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992) and the exemplar-based random walk model (Nosofsky & Palmeri, 1997). The applications reveal aspects of these models that were not hitherto known and bring a mix of bad and good news concerning estimation of these models.</p>","PeriodicalId":79800,"journal":{"name":"Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc","volume":"36 1","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3758/bf03195544","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the informational value of parameter estimates in cognitive models.\",\"authors\":\"Tom Verguts,&nbsp;Gert Storms\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/bf03195544\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Mathematical models of cognition often contain unknown parameters whose values are estimated from the data. A question that generally receives little attention is how informative such estimates are. In a maximum likelihood framework, standard errors provide a measure of informativeness. Here, a standard error is interpreted as the standard deviation of the distribution of parameter estimates over multiple samples. A drawback to this interpretation is that the assumptions that are required for the maximum likelihood framework are very difficult to test and are not always met. However, at least in the cognitive science community, it appears to be not well known that standard error calculation also yields interpretable intervals outside the typical maximum likelihood framework. We describe and motivate this procedure and, in combination with graphical methods, apply it to two recent models of categorization: ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992) and the exemplar-based random walk model (Nosofsky & Palmeri, 1997). The applications reveal aspects of these models that were not hitherto known and bring a mix of bad and good news concerning estimation of these models.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"1-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3758/bf03195544\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03195544\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03195544","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

认知的数学模型通常包含未知参数,这些参数的值是从数据中估计出来的。通常很少受到注意的一个问题是,这种估计的信息量有多大。在最大似然框架中,标准误差提供了信息量的度量。在这里,标准误差被解释为多个样本上参数估计分布的标准差。这种解释的一个缺点是,最大似然框架所需的假设很难检验,而且并不总是满足。然而,至少在认知科学界,标准误差计算在典型的最大似然框架之外也产生了可解释的区间,这一点似乎并不为人所熟知。我们描述和激励这一过程,并结合图形方法,将其应用于最近的两种分类模型:ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992)和基于示例的随机漫步模型(Nosofsky & Palmeri, 1997)。应用程序揭示了这些模型迄今为止不为人知的方面,并带来了关于这些模型估计的坏消息和好消息的混合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing the informational value of parameter estimates in cognitive models.

Mathematical models of cognition often contain unknown parameters whose values are estimated from the data. A question that generally receives little attention is how informative such estimates are. In a maximum likelihood framework, standard errors provide a measure of informativeness. Here, a standard error is interpreted as the standard deviation of the distribution of parameter estimates over multiple samples. A drawback to this interpretation is that the assumptions that are required for the maximum likelihood framework are very difficult to test and are not always met. However, at least in the cognitive science community, it appears to be not well known that standard error calculation also yields interpretable intervals outside the typical maximum likelihood framework. We describe and motivate this procedure and, in combination with graphical methods, apply it to two recent models of categorization: ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992) and the exemplar-based random walk model (Nosofsky & Palmeri, 1997). The applications reveal aspects of these models that were not hitherto known and bring a mix of bad and good news concerning estimation of these models.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信