Five Points to Check when Comparing Visual Perception in Humans and Machines
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
With the rise of machines to human-level performance in complex recognition tasks, a growing amount of work is directed towards comparing information processing in humans and machines. These studies are an exciting chance to learn about one system by studying the other. Here, we propose ideas on how to design, conduct and interpret experiments such that they adequately support the investigation of mechanisms when comparing human and machine perception. We demonstrate and apply these ideas through three case studies. The first case study shows how human bias can affect how we interpret results, and that several analytic tools can help to overcome this human reference point. In the second case study, we highlight the difference between necessary and sufficient mechanisms in visual reasoning tasks. Thereby, we show that contrary to previous suggestions, feedback mechanisms might not be necessary for the tasks in question. The third case study highlights the importance of aligning experimental conditions. We find that a previously-observed difference in object recognition does not hold when adapting the experiment to make conditions more equitable between humans and machines. In presenting a checklist for comparative studies of visual reasoning in humans and machines, we hope to highlight how to overcome potential pitfalls in design or inference.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 20 Apr 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 4; 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 1.
8 papers.
- 2022Deep Learning Methods for Abstract Visual Reasoning: A Survey on Raven's Progressive Matricescited by 37
- 2021Convolutional Neural Networks Are Not Invariant to Translation, but They Can Learn to Becited by 19
- 2021Comparing object recognition in humans and deep convolutional neural networks -- An eye tracking studycited by 12
- 2022AutoGPart: Intermediate Supervision Search for Generalizable 3D Part Segmentationcited by 10
- 2021Recurrent Vision Transformer for Solving Visual Reasoning Problemscited by 9
- 2021Arguments for the Unsuitability of Convolutional Neural Networks for Non--Local Taskscited by 2
- 2024Unveiling the Human-like Similarities of Automatic Facial Expression Recognition: An Empirical Exploration through Explainable AIcited by 2
- 2023Human Machine Co-Creation. A Complementary Cognitive Approach to Creative Character Design Process Using GANscited by 1
- 2024Unveiling the Human-like Similarities of Automatic Facial Expression Recognition: An Empirical Exploration through Explainable AI22 Jan 2024
- 2023Human Machine Co-Creation. A Complementary Cognitive Approach to Creative Character Design Process Using GANs23 Nov 2023
- 2022AutoGPart: Intermediate Supervision Search for Generalizable 3D Part Segmentation13 Mar 2022
- 2022Deep Learning Methods for Abstract Visual Reasoning: A Survey on Raven's Progressive Matrices28 Jan 2022
- 2021Recurrent Vision Transformer for Solving Visual Reasoning Problems29 Nov 2021
- 2021Convolutional Neural Networks Are Not Invariant to Translation, but They Can Learn to Be12 Oct 2021
- 2021Comparing object recognition in humans and deep convolutional neural networks -- An eye tracking study30 Jul 2021
- 2021Arguments for the Unsuitability of Convolutional Neural Networks for Non--Local Tasks23 Feb 2021