Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33303770›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Computational modeling of human reasoning processes for interpretable visual knowledge: a case study with radiographers.

Yu Li, Hongfei Cao, Carla M Allen, Xin Wang, Sanda Erdelez, Chi-Ren Shyu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yu LiDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA.
Hongfei CaoDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA.
Carla M AllenDepartment of Clinical and Diagnostic Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA.
Xin WangDepartment of Information Science, University of Northern Texas, Denton, TX, 76203, USA.
Sanda ErdelezSchool of Library and Information Science, Simmons University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Chi-Ren ShyuDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA. shyuc@missouri.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual reasoning is critical in many complex visual tasks in medicine such as radiology or pathology. It is challenging to explicitly explain reasoning processes due to the dynamic nature of real-time human cognition. A deeper understanding of such reasoning processes is necessary for improving diagnostic accuracy and computational tools. Most computational analysis methods for visual attention utilize black-box algorithms which lack explainability and are therefore limited in understanding the visual reasoning processes. In this paper, we propose a computational method to quantify and dissect visual reasoning. The method characterizes spatial and temporal features and identifies common and contrast visual reasoning patterns to extract significant gaze activities. The visual reasoning patterns are explainable and can be compared among different groups to discover strategy differences. Experiments with radiographers of varied levels of expertise on 10 levels of visual tasks were conducted. Our empirical observations show that the method can capture the temporal and spatial features of human visual attention and distinguish expertise level. The extracted patterns are further examined and interpreted to showcase key differences between expertise levels in the visual reasoning processes. By revealing task-related reasoning processes, this method demonstrates potential for explaining human visual understanding.

Indexed as

KnowledgeRadiographyThinkingVisual PerceptionAlgorithmsComputer SimulationHumansOrganizational Case Studies

Identifiers

PMID33303770
PMCPMC7730148

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.