语义期望对目标检测的影响:用图赋值来阐明机制。

Q2 Medicine
Rachel M Skocypec, Mary A Peterson
{"title":"语义期望对目标检测的影响:用图赋值来阐明机制。","authors":"Rachel M Skocypec,&nbsp;Mary A Peterson","doi":"10.3390/vision6010019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent evidence suggesting that object detection is improved following valid rather than invalid labels implies that semantics influence object detection. It is not clear, however, whether the results index object detection or feature detection. Further, because control conditions were absent and labels and objects were repeated multiple times, the mechanisms are unknown. We assessed object detection via figure assignment, whereby objects are segmented from backgrounds. Masked bipartite displays depicting a portion of a mono-oriented object (a familiar configuration) on one side of a central border were shown once only for 90 or 100 ms. Familiar configuration is a figural prior. Accurate detection was indexed by reports of an object on the familiar configuration side of the border. Compared to control experiments without labels, valid labels improved accuracy and reduced response times (RTs) more for upright than inverted objects (Studies 1 and 2). Invalid labels denoting different superordinate-level objects (DSC; Study 1) or same superordinate-level objects (SSC; Study 2) reduced accuracy for upright displays only. Orientation dependency indicates that effects are mediated by activated object representations rather than features which are invariant over orientation. Following invalid SSC labels (Study 2), accurate detection RTs were longer than control for both orientations, implicating conflict between semantic representations that had to be resolved before object detection. These results demonstrate that object detection is not just affected by semantics, it entails semantics.</p>","PeriodicalId":36586,"journal":{"name":"Vision (Switzerland)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8953613/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Semantic Expectation Effects on Object Detection: Using Figure Assignment to Elucidate Mechanisms.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel M Skocypec,&nbsp;Mary A Peterson\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/vision6010019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Recent evidence suggesting that object detection is improved following valid rather than invalid labels implies that semantics influence object detection. It is not clear, however, whether the results index object detection or feature detection. Further, because control conditions were absent and labels and objects were repeated multiple times, the mechanisms are unknown. We assessed object detection via figure assignment, whereby objects are segmented from backgrounds. Masked bipartite displays depicting a portion of a mono-oriented object (a familiar configuration) on one side of a central border were shown once only for 90 or 100 ms. Familiar configuration is a figural prior. Accurate detection was indexed by reports of an object on the familiar configuration side of the border. Compared to control experiments without labels, valid labels improved accuracy and reduced response times (RTs) more for upright than inverted objects (Studies 1 and 2). Invalid labels denoting different superordinate-level objects (DSC; Study 1) or same superordinate-level objects (SSC; Study 2) reduced accuracy for upright displays only. Orientation dependency indicates that effects are mediated by activated object representations rather than features which are invariant over orientation. Following invalid SSC labels (Study 2), accurate detection RTs were longer than control for both orientations, implicating conflict between semantic representations that had to be resolved before object detection. These results demonstrate that object detection is not just affected by semantics, it entails semantics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36586,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vision (Switzerland)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8953613/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vision (Switzerland)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/vision6010019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision (Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/vision6010019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

最近的证据表明,在有效标签而不是无效标签下,对象检测得到改善,这意味着语义影响对象检测。然而,目前尚不清楚,这些结果是对象检测还是特征检测。此外,由于缺乏控制条件,标签和对象被重复多次,机制是未知的。我们通过图形分配来评估目标检测,即从背景中分割目标。在中央边界的一侧显示一个单方向物体的一部分(一种熟悉的结构)的蒙面二部分显示仅显示一次,持续时间为90或100毫秒。熟悉的配置是一个图形先验。准确的检测是由一个物体在边界的熟悉配置侧的报告索引。与没有标签的对照实验相比,有效标签对直立物体的准确性和响应时间(RTs)的提高高于倒置物体(研究1和2)。无效标签表示不同的上级水平物体(DSC;研究1)或相同的上级对象(SSC;研究2)仅降低了直立显示器的准确性。方向依赖性表明,效果是由激活的对象表征介导的,而不是由在方向上不变的特征介导的。在无效的SSC标签之后(研究2),两个方向的准确检测rt都比对照组长,这意味着在物体检测之前必须解决语义表示之间的冲突。这些结果表明,目标检测不仅受语义的影响,而且需要语义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Semantic Expectation Effects on Object Detection: Using Figure Assignment to Elucidate Mechanisms.

Semantic Expectation Effects on Object Detection: Using Figure Assignment to Elucidate Mechanisms.

Semantic Expectation Effects on Object Detection: Using Figure Assignment to Elucidate Mechanisms.

Semantic Expectation Effects on Object Detection: Using Figure Assignment to Elucidate Mechanisms.

Recent evidence suggesting that object detection is improved following valid rather than invalid labels implies that semantics influence object detection. It is not clear, however, whether the results index object detection or feature detection. Further, because control conditions were absent and labels and objects were repeated multiple times, the mechanisms are unknown. We assessed object detection via figure assignment, whereby objects are segmented from backgrounds. Masked bipartite displays depicting a portion of a mono-oriented object (a familiar configuration) on one side of a central border were shown once only for 90 or 100 ms. Familiar configuration is a figural prior. Accurate detection was indexed by reports of an object on the familiar configuration side of the border. Compared to control experiments without labels, valid labels improved accuracy and reduced response times (RTs) more for upright than inverted objects (Studies 1 and 2). Invalid labels denoting different superordinate-level objects (DSC; Study 1) or same superordinate-level objects (SSC; Study 2) reduced accuracy for upright displays only. Orientation dependency indicates that effects are mediated by activated object representations rather than features which are invariant over orientation. Following invalid SSC labels (Study 2), accurate detection RTs were longer than control for both orientations, implicating conflict between semantic representations that had to be resolved before object detection. These results demonstrate that object detection is not just affected by semantics, it entails semantics.

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
Vision (Switzerland)
Vision (Switzerland) Health Professions-Optometry
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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