Ask any question about EPFL courses, lectures, exercises, research, news, etc. or try the example questions below.
DISCLAIMER: The Graph Chatbot is not programmed to provide explicit or categorical answers to your questions. Rather, it transforms your questions into API requests that are distributed across the various IT services officially administered by EPFL. Its purpose is solely to collect and recommend relevant references to content that you can explore to help you answer your questions.
Perceptual learning improves perception through training. Perceptual learning improves with most stimulus types but fails when certain stimulus types are mixed during training (roving). This result is surprising because classical supervised and unsupervised neural network models can cope easily with roving conditions. What makes humans so inferior compared to these models? As experimental and conceptual work has shown, human perceptual learning is neither supervised nor unsupervised but reward-based learning. Reward-based learning suffers from the so-called unsupervised bias, i.e., to prevent synaptic "drift", the average reward has to be exactly estimated. However, this is impossible when two or more stimulus types with different rewards are presented during training (and the reward is estimated by a running average). For this reason, we propose no learning occurs in roving conditions. However, roving hinders perceptual learning only for combinations of similar stimulus types but not for dissimilar ones. In this latter case, we propose that a critic can estimate the reward for each stimulus type separately. One implication of our analysis is that the critic cannot be located in the visual system. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Alexandre Massoud Alahi, Pascal Turberg, Nils Frédérik Heiden Olsen
Jan Sickmann Hesthaven, Mariella Kast, Philipp Christoph Weder