↓ Skip to main content

View-invariance learning in object recognition by pigeons depends on error-driven associative learning processes

Overview of attention for article published in Vision Research, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
bluesky
1 Bluesky user

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
View-invariance learning in object recognition by pigeons depends on error-driven associative learning processes
Published in
Vision Research, April 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.visres.2012.04.004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabian A. Soto, Jeffrey Y.M. Siow, Edward A. Wasserman

Abstract

A model hypothesizing that basic mechanisms of associative learning and generalization underlie object categorization in vertebrates can account for a large body of animal and human data. Here, we report two experiments which implicate error-driven associative learning in pigeons' recognition of objects across changes in viewpoint. Experiment 1 found that object recognition across changes in viewpoint depends on how well each view predicts reward. Analyses of generalization performance, spatial position of pecks to images, and learning curves all showed behavioral patterns analogous to those found in prior studies of relative validity in associative learning. In Experiment 2, pigeons were trained to recognize objects from multiple viewpoints, which usually promotes robust performance at novel views of the trained objects. However, when the objects possessed a salient, informative metric property for solving the task, the pigeons did not show view-invariant recognition of the training objects, a result analogous to the overshadowing effect in associative learning.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Spain 1 4%
Unknown 25 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 30%
Student > Master 3 11%
Researcher 3 11%
Lecturer 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Computer Science 4 15%
Psychology 4 15%
Neuroscience 3 11%
Engineering 3 11%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2012.
All research outputs
#22,939,809
of 28,082,908 outputs
Outputs from Vision Research
#2,280
of 2,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,779
of 181,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vision Research
#12
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,082,908 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,582 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 181,918 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.