nips nips2006 nips2006-192 nips2006-192-reference knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: pdf
Author: Paul R. Schrater, Rashmi Sundareswara
Abstract: Perceptual Bistability refers to the phenomenon of spontaneously switching between two or more interpretations of an image under continuous viewing. Although switching behavior is increasingly well characterized, the origins remain elusive. We propose that perceptual switching naturally arises from the brain’s search for best interpretations while performing Bayesian inference. In particular, we propose that the brain explores a posterior distribution over image interpretations at a rapid time scale via a sampling-like process and updates its interpretation when a sampled interpretation is better than the discounted value of its current interpretation. We formalize the theory, explicitly derive switching rate distributions and discuss qualitative properties of the theory including the effect of changes in the posterior distribution on switching rates. Finally, predictions of the theory are shown to be consistent with measured changes in human switching dynamics to Necker cube stimuli induced by context.
[1] Aldous, D .(1989) Probability approximations via the Poisson clumping heuristic. Applied Math. Sci, 77. Springer-Verlag, New York.
[2] Bialek, W., DeWeese, M. (1995) Random Switching and Optimal Processing in the Perception of Ambiguous Signals. Physics Review Letters 74(15) 3077-80.
[3] Brascamp, J. W., van Ee, R., Pestman, W. R., & van den Berg, A. V. (2005). Distributions of alternation rates in various forms of bistable perception. J. of Vision 5(4), 287-298.
[4] Einhauser, W., Martin, K. A., & Konig, P. (2004). Are switches in perception of the Necker cube related to eye position? Eur J Neuroscience 20(10), 2811-2818.
[5] Freeman, W.T (1994) The generic viewpoint assumption in a framework for visual perception Nature vol. 368, April 1994.
[6] von Grunau, M. W., Wiggin, S. & Reed, M. (1984). The local character of perspective organization. Perception and Psychophysics 35(4), 319-324.
[7] Kersten, D., Mamassian, P. & Yuille, A. (2004) Object Perception as Bayesian Inference Annual Review of Psychology Vol. 55, 271-304.
[8] Lee, T.S. & Mumford, D. (2003) Hierarchical Bayesian Inference in the Visual Cortex Journal of the Optical Society of America Vol. 20, No. 7.
[9] Leopold, D. and Logothetis, N.(1999) Multistable phenomena: Changing views in Perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. Vol.3, No.7, 254-264.
[10] Long, G., Toppino, T. & Mondin, G. (1992) Prime Time: Fatigue and set effects in the perception of reversible figures. Perception and Psychophysics Vol.52, No.6, 609-616.
[11] Mamassian, P. & Goutcher, R. (2005) Temporal dynamics in Bistable Perception. Journal of Vision. No. 5, 361-375.
[12] Rock, I. and Mitchener, K.(1992) Further evidence of the failure of reversal of ambiguous figures by uninformed subjects. Perception 21, 39-45.
[13] Ross, S. M. (1970) Applied Probability Models with Optimization Applications. Holden-Day.
[14] Stocker, A. & Simoncelli, E. (2006) Noise characteristics and prior expectations in human visual speed perception Nature Neuroscience vol.9, no.4, 578-585.
[15] Toppino, T. C. (2003). Reversible-figure perception: mechanisms of intentional control. Perception and Psychophysics 65(8), 1285-1295.
[16] Toppino, T. C. & Long, G. M. (1987). Selective adaptation with reversible figures: don’t change that channel. Perception and Psychophysics 42(1), 37-48.
[17] van Ee, R., Adams, W. J., & Mamassian, P. (2003). Bayesian modeling of cue interaction: Bi-stability in stereo-scopic slant perception. J.of the Opt. Soc. of Am. A, 20, 1398-1406.
[18] van Ee, R., van Dam, L.C.J., Brouwer,G.J. (2005) Dynamics of perceptual bi-stability for stereoscopic slant rivalry. Vision Res., 45, 29-40.