ArticleArXiv2025
Ordinal Characterization of Similarity Judgments.
Article in ArXiv, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Characterizing judgments of similarity within a perceptual or semantic domain, and making inferences about the underlying structure of this domain from these judgments, has an increasingly important role in cognitive and systems neuroscience. We present a new framework for this purpose that makes limited assumptions about how perceptual distances are converted into similarity judgments. The approach starts from a dataset of empirical judgments of relative similarities: the fraction of times that a subject chooses one of two comparison stimuli to be more similar to a reference stimulus. These empirical judgments provide Bayesian estimates of underling choice probabilities. From these estimates, we derive indices that characterize the set of judgments in three ways: compatibility with a symmetric dis-similarity, compatibility with an ultrametric space, and compatibility with an additive tree. Each of the indices is derived from rank-order relationships among the choice probabilities that, as we show, are necessary and sufficient for local consistency with the three respective characteristics. We illustrate this approach with simulations and example psychophysical datasets of dis-similarity judgments in several visual domains and provide code that implements the analyses at https://github.com/jvlab/simrank.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37873008PMC10593068What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.