ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
Comparing a computational model of visual problem solving with human vision on a difficult vision task.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 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.
- Determinants of visual ambiguity resolution.Communications psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human vision is not merely a passive process of interpreting sensory input but can also function as a problem-solving process incorporating generative mechanisms to interpret ambiguous or noisy data. This synergy between the generative and discriminative components, often described as analysis-by-synthesis, enables robust perception and rapid adaptation to out-of-distribution inputs. In this work, we investigate a computational implementation of the analysis-by-synthesis paradigm using genetic search in a generative model, applied to a visual problem-solving task inspired by star constellations. The search is guided by low-level cues based on the structural fitness of candidate solutions compared to the test images. This dataset serves as a testbed for exploring how inferred signals can guide the synthesis of suitable solutions in ambiguous conditions, framing visual inference as an instance of complex problem solving. Drawing on insights from human experiments, we develop a generative search algorithm and compare its performance to humans, examining factors such as accuracy, reaction time, and overlap in drawings. Our results shed light on possible mechanisms of human visual problem solving and highlight the potential of generative search models to emulate aspects of this process.
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.