ArticleJournal of vision2025
Target identification under high levels of amplitude, size, orientation and background uncertainty.
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optimal visual search with highly heuristic decision rules.Journal of vision · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Many natural tasks require the visual system to classify image patches accurately into target categories, including the category of no target. Natural target categories often involve high levels of within-category variability (uncertainty), making it challenging to uncover the underlying computational mechanisms. Here, we describe these tasks as identification from a set of exhaustive, mutually exclusive target categories, each partitioned into mutually exclusive subcategories. We derive the optimal decision rule and present a computational method to simulate performance for moderately large and complex tasks. We focus on the detection of an additive wavelet target in white noise with five dimensions of stimulus uncertainty: target amplitude, orientation, scale, background contrast, and spatial pattern. We compare the performance of the ideal observer with various heuristic observers. We find that a properly normalized heuristic MAX observer (SNN-MAX) approximates optimal performance. We also find that a convolutional neural network trained on this task approaches but does not reach optimal performance, even with extensive training. We measured human performance on a task with three of these dimensions of uncertainty (orientation, scale, and background pattern). Results show that the pattern of hits and correct rejections for the ideal and SNN-MAX observers (but not a simple MAX observer) aligns with the data. Additionally, we measured performance without scale and orientation uncertainty and found that the effect of uncertainty on performance was less than predicted by any model. This unexpectedly small effect can largely be explained by incorporating biologically plausible levels of intrinsic position uncertainty into the models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.