Introduction

Having started out as a right is what it is like to do is to I got my god what is it about a bit of a and studied the second section of the book “principles of cognitive psychology” under the heading of “perception and recognition”, I am beginning to wonder how much of cognitive psychology overlaps with the study of artificial intelligence. In this blog, I am going to give a summary or an overview of what I have read and understood so far, and then compare it with my personal experience in working with electronics and artificial intelligence. I will therefore divide this blog up into two parts: A) perception and recognition in psychology, and B) image processing and identification in electronics and artificial intelligence. As with previous blogs, this article will conclude with a short reflective paragraph together with plans on future reading.

Part one: perception and recognition in psychology

To begin with, the book describes how the pathways of light starts from the object entering into the eyes and finally reaching the cortex in the brain. This part of the discussion is no different to what we learn at secondary school in physics and biology. The book then moves on to discuss the various visually related phenomen such as: simultaneous contrast, dark adaptation, colour processing, motion processing, visual illusions, pattern recognition and object recognition. For each of these phenomena, there is a summary of proposed the theories along with their supporting evidence. However, as noted in previous blog, these theories are not definitive as we shall see in this blog.

Simultaneous contrast

Simultaneous contrast refers to situations where a certain colour looks darker or lighter depending on the colours of the background. It was suggested that our eyes and brain are more sensitive to the relative difference of illumination than the actual colour itself. This theory has been used to explain how a person can be colour blind and yet able to perceive visually.

Dark adaptation

Dark adaptation is where visibility increases in the dark over a period of time. Unsurprisingly, the enlargement of the pupils was discussed in the book. Although a wide range of experiments proving the existence of dark adaptation are described in the book, there are no further explanation offered. At this stage, I began to question whether I am reading physics and biology or psychology. Nonetheless, just for the sake of amusing myself and out of the determination to find something new, I continued reading.

Colour processing

Colour processing as its name implies is concerned with our ability to distinguish different colours. The book is in the dangling out of the brain scans will use together to study this topic. It has been noted that certain area of the brain known as V4 had an increase of 13% of blood flow when a coloured stimulator is presented. This increase of blood flow in the area is considered as evidence of brain activity in order to process information triggered by the stimulator.

Motion processing

Motion processing is to do with identifying moving objects. I was surprised to find that different parts of our brain are responsible for seeing stationary objects and moving objects. There is an area of the brain commonly known by the profession as V5, which is responsible for identifying all moving objects. Again, brain scans and monitoring of blood flow were used to identify the area. Interestingly, patients with brain damage in area V5 cannot see moving objects. In other words, stationary objects can be seen normally, just like everyone else. However, as soon as the objects begin to move they become invisible. Some patients have reported difficulty in pouring tea or coffee into a cup, because the fluid appeared to be frozen. They cannot gauge when to stop pouring, because they simply cannot see the fluid. In order to gauge accurately, they have to guess when to stop pouring, stop, wait, and look inside the cup when there is no movement. Then, and only then, can they decide accurately whether they need to stop pouring tea or coffee.

Visual illusions

The book then moves on to discuss how visual illusions work. Again, many theories were proposed, but none are definitive. For instance, the Ponzo illusion was explained by three-dimensional vision. In this theory, it is suggested that our brain automatically interprets two-dimensional images as a representative of the three-dimensional objects. In the case of this illusion, the lines that represent a train track gives the illusion that object A is further away from us then object B.  One therefore assume that if both objects are of the same size, the one further away from us would be smaller when presented in two-dimensional format. Since this picture shows that both objects are about the same size on a two-dimensional plane, one would assume that object  A (the one further away) is actually bigger. Of course, this will not be the case if one was to measure it on paper, which is two-dimensional.

However, if this theory was true, one would expect our judgement in three-dimensional situations to be perfect. However the book spine experiment shows that visual illusions occurs in three-dimensional situations as well. In this experiment, three books are placed so that the spines of the books are equally spaced between them all. The two books on the left are opened up facing each other while the third book is opened up facing away from the other two books. Although performed in three-dimensional situation, we arrived at the illusion that the two book facing each other much closer than the other book. Once again, this book finishes this section of discussion without definitive theory or explanation to the phenomenon.

Pattern recognition

Pattern recognition is concerned with recognising single patterns such as letters and  numerical symbols. When there are so many variations in orientation, typeface, size, and writing styles, how does the brain actually recognise these patterns? One theory suggests that the brain uses different for each pattern when a given pattern matches a template, a recognition is said to have occurred. In support of this theory, computational experiments had been set up to demonstrate the use of templates for pattern recognition. For instance, it has been shown that computers can correctly recognised 69% of numerical digits with only a handful of different templates installed per digit. With increasing number of templates per digit, higher accuracy of recognition is also achieved.

However, this method of recognition does not account for variations in writing styles. Therefore, an alternative theory known as feature theory was proposed. According to this theory, we recognise patterns by identifying key features of the pattern. For example, the letter ‘A’ can be described as two straight legs and a connecting crossbar. However it has been shown that word patterns of letters were made up of smaller letters, recognition of the letters is not always consistent with the theory. Once again, the book exits the discussion without a concrete theory in place.

Object recognition

Object recognition is concerned with how we identify objects. According to the theory of recognition by components, we recognise objects by studying the edges of the object. For instance, by looking at the curvature, combination of parallel lines, symmetry and straight lines, we associate what we see with the objects we know. In support of this theory, simple pictures were drawn and subjects were asked to identify these objects. Gradually though, various features of these pictures were removed and success rate in identifying these objects were recorded. It was found that information pertaining to the edges of the objects were crucial to successful identification, whereas those pertaining to surface features such as decoration and patterns make no difference to the performance.

Part two: image processing and identification in electronics and artificial intelligence

While I was working as an electronics engineer, I was working on a project dealing with CCTV footage. The goal of the project was to use the camera footage to monitor a warehouse. Although it would seem to be a simple task, we were asked to design a program that could control up to 50 cameras to home in into problem spots from different angles. It is hoped that by doing so, the company would stand a better chance of capturing crucial features of the intruder from different angles. However, this is easier said than done. For example, one could argue that all we need is a motion sensor. If the movement is detected, then move nearby CCTV to focus on the detection spot. However, what if a cat passes by? Or what if there are more than one person involved in breaking into the premises? How will the system cope? Therefore, our task involved studying CCTV images and identifying a way of recognising common objects.

In this case, the CCTV images are equivalent to retinal images. These images on its own have no meaning whatsoever, or at least not until the brain or the computer has processed the information and interpreted it. In this respect I find what I have been reading in cognitive psychology remarkably similar to what may be called artificial intelligence.

Part of the work that I did, we use edges for object identification. More specifically, we have looked at significant changes in colours to identify edges. The underlying assumption here is that the edges of an object can be identified by colours. For example, a white car that is parked in the middle of the park would have green surroundings around it. Therefore, if we draw a line between colour contrasts, we would be able to trace the shape of the car.

Identifying the shape of a car or any other object was not too difficult. Since many of these objects have common dimensions and size, engineers can use 3-D vectors and are the mathematical tools to identify objects. However, before these mathematical tools can be employed, first we need to know the dimensions that of the objects. Of course, this means interpreting two-dimensional images. This again is a problem. Take a book for example, if the book was placed near the camera, it will look bigger; if however the book is placed further away from the camera, it will look smaller. This is where the study of aspect ratio comes in. Typically, engineers will include objects with known size in their images so that they can calculate the size of the object of interest by comparison. In our project, we made sure that all our cameras can see certain fixed size objects that will help us in our calculation.

In terms of motion detection, we have tried to compare images captured five seconds apart. For the most part, where things are stationary they should not be any differences between the two images. However, if a person is walking by, we should be able to detect the motion by comparing the images before and after. By comparing and generalising the changes observed, our program was able to detect motions and predict future movements.

Reflection

As I began reading this book, I was very worried because I did not know where I was going. It appeared to me that I was not learning anything new or other than basic secondary school level of physics and biology. However, as I read on, I am pleased that my patience paid off. On reflection, I have found the explanation of motion perception and object recognition remarkably similar to the work I have done in the field of electronics and artificial intelligence. I am pleasantly surprised with what I found.

At this point, I am faced with the dilemma. I am absolutely fascinated by the similarity of cognitive psychology and artificial intelligence. Of course, with my background in electronics, I am inclined to investigate this area further. However, it seems to me that doing so will be defeating the objective of this exercise. For this reason, I have decided to stick with this book and just make my own observation and draw my own parallels with electronics and artificial intelligence as I go along.

Moving on

Looking at the table of contents of the book, the next few sections will be dealing with memory, languages and decision-making. No doubt there will be a lot of similarity with what I’ve done before, but until I finish reading the book and summarising my findings on this blog, I shall refrain from going back into my comfort zone.

Perhaps worth noting at this point, in the back of my mind, I am beginning to wonder how much of this overlap with what I personally know as electronics and artificial intelligence is also an overlap with web science.

My research question is: How has the Web affected the rise and fall of small bands/independent musicians?

Two disciplines: Economics and Sociology

The Web has a large influence on the popularity and reach of music, this is true now more than in previous decades. In terms of Economics I will be exploring how the Web has improved the access to consumers and how this has affected small bands. In terms of Sociology, the Web is not just useful for providing products to a large group of people, it is also used to build social networks which may have an impact on small bands.

The reason behind choosing these two disciplines is that money and society are two large factors in how much an independent musician can ‘achieve’. Using Economics, I will explore how social networks interact with the current economic models for pricing and making profit for the bands. Using Sociology, I will examine the idea that social networks allow larger connection of music fans to each other and to the bands that they are fans of. I will also explore how social networking impacts on the bands’ popularity and reach.

In order to start researching these topics I have visited the library and borrowed introductory textbooks on both Economics and Sociology.

Scope of cognitive psychology

cognitive psychology is generally understood to be a part of psychology, but specialises in studying the internal mental process of perception, memory, and decision-making. In the book “principles of cognitive psychology”, it is described as:

“a study of the main internal psychological processes that are involved in making sense of the environment and deciding what action might be appropriate”.

Challenges of studying cognitive psychology

cognitive psychology is a difficult subject to study, not because it is intellectually challenging, but the subject of study is invisible to human eyes. In addition, the processes involved within our brain are not always clear.

For example, there was a time when it was believed that thinking process works in a sequential manner. In other words, it was believed that we process information one at a time and those processes never happen in parallel. This idea however cannot explain how human can multitask. This has now been replaced with the theory of parallel processing.

Similarly, it was believed that stimulus always generate a response. According to this theory, a piece of reading material can be a form of stimulus, which in turn triggers some response or action that can be measured. This conceptual framework is called top-down processing. However, many experiments have been designed and shown and that people miss read statements because of the brain is not reacting purely and simply to the stimulus. To the contrary, we have our own perception and expectation, which may interfere with the way we process the stimulus information. We were given an example of a statement which says, “Paris in the the spring”. It has been shown through similar experiments with the repeatable results and observations that many people read the statement as, “Paris in the spring”. The fact that the word of “the” is repeated is often missed out. This is an example of bottom-up processing of the brain. In other words, the brain is not just reacting to the stimulus as an independent trigger of response, but perception and expectation has a role to play as well.

Overall, there is a strong message in these introductory chapters that the main challenge in cognitive psychology is to identify the exact process used by the brain. In engineering terms, one can describe the situation as a study of a black box, where inputs and outputs can be controlled measured but opening up the blackbox is prohibited. Or perhaps in mathematical terms, one can describe the situation as a study of a function box, where again the inputs and outputs can be measured but the precise mathematical function of the box is not known. In both analogies, we can see multiple possibilities and theories can be developed for any given set of inputs and outputs. Therefore, we can never be sure that the proposed process represents the way the brain functions. At best, we arrive at a conceptual model that helps our understanding.

Four main research methods in cognitive psychology

Given that we’re studying the blackbox that we may not open, the next logical question is how does one study it? It would appear in the area of cognitive psychology, there are four main ways of studying cognition: A) by experiment, B) by comparing brain-damaged patients, C) by developing computational models, and D) by brain scans.

Experiment

out of all the methods, the experimental methods is the easiest to understand. There are usually conducted in a controlled environment, which lends itself to scientific studies of data. However this type of approaches are commonly challenged for two reasons: A) as explained before, these can only provide indirect evidence about the internal processes involved, and B) given the context of a controlled environment, which is highly artificial, it is often difficult to justify or believe that the subjects will behave in an identical manner in real life.

Comparison

the comparison method is an interesting one. Essentially, cognitive psychologists look for brain-damaged patients and compare what they can or cannot do with other patients. For example, if they have patients who can speak very well but cannot hear, they can then conclude that the processes involved in speaking are independent of those for hearing. This method is most conclusive when patients with opposite skills matrix occur. For instance, if a group of patients can do task A very well but not task B, and another group of patients can do task B very well but not task A, we can then conclude with confidence that the processes involved in task A or B are totally independent of each other.

This method has its own limitations though. For example, where patients can perform part of the task, can we still make a conclusion? Also, this issue is that there is only one or two of the brain that contributes to a certain function. However, more often than not, unless the task is exceptionally simple, different functions of the brain will be invoked. Take matching shapes as an example. Young children are often given toys which required them to recognise different shapes. This is a very simple task in its own right. However, it involves long-term memory (remembering the instruction given), short-term memory (what their eyes have just seen), decision-making, and motor skills. It is often very difficult to isolate these processes as totally independent of each other.

computational models

computational models are closely akin to a branch of computer science called artificial intelligence. Feeding by the information gathered through previous methods, programmers builds computational models to represent cognitive processes. Although cannot guarantee to be representative of the exact cognitive process involved, it does allow a systematic way of investigating the processes. Usually, the programmers involved use what is known as the connection networks, where there are input links, processing units, and output links. Unlike computer networks where there is specific location for memories, connection networks in psychology have memories distributed over the network.

brain scans

finally, the last approach makes use of a modern technology in brain scanning to establish where and when cognitive processes happen within the brain. This method of study has been very useful in areas where processors function in discreet ways. However, it has been less successful in higher order cognitive functions such as reasoning and decision-making or where cognitive functions and processes do overlap.

Reflection

it has been very interesting to read through the introductory chapters of my first book in cognitive psychology. I have found the definition and scope of cognitive psychology very helpful and the chapters discussing the four major approaches informative. I was very surprised to see how brain-damaged patients can help in research. And of course technological advances has made it possible to probe into the blackbox itself.

Moving On

This book then continues to discuss cognitive psychology in four main study areas: A) three chapters on recognition and perception, B) two chapters on memory management, C) two chapters on language comprehension and production, and D) three chapters on problem solving and decision making. I will be updating my blog as I read and reflect on the material as I consider these areas one at a time.

Anyone had any ideas on the best way to find the core text books for your disciplines?  If you have a contact who has studied the discipline that seems like the obvious route, but what if you haven’t? I tried:

Go to library by subject

This is great for pointing you at databases of journals but not so hot for basic textbooks.

Search Webcat for subject + introduction

Better … .  My two disciplines are marketing and either film studies or journalism. It worked quite well for marketing  and film studies – only about 10 to choose from – although they were mostly on loan.  Not so well for  journalism – not at all obvious which were solid introductions to the subject.

Search on Amazon for subject + introduction

Again worked OK for marketing  and film studies – the comments allowed me to confirm the  books in the library were good choices.  Journalism produced a rather long list and it was hard to tell which were good and also how to get hold of them without spending large amounts.

Looks like it is going to film studies!

Research question:

Something on the lines of:

How do scientists use the web to communicate with the public

Just testing the blog.
Katie Spires

This is just a random first post which “hopefully” I will later delete. This is just to check the technology is working as expected. Readers please ignore.

The Web is changing the nature of competition between businesses as new ways of delivering and marketing services and products emerge, together with new ways to innovate and organise your supply chain. My research question is around the ways in which such changes are taking places from a range of different perspectives (supply side and demand side, micro and macro) and whether they mark a materially different kind of competition from offline competition. It may naturally lead into a wider question about the potential for very distinct forms of competition/collaboration between businesses in the future using the Web and the potential benefits/risks involved matched against how the current legal/regulatory framework applies (a potential PhD topic). For the purposes of this project, however, the initial question may narrow and focus on one particular aspect – such as disintermediation in the supply chain – as my enquiry goes along for succinctness on points of comparison. My two research topics are management and economics.

At present I have a set of questions around the primary ontologies of disciplines and their relation to the web. These questions are to do with: how easy is it to collaborate within subjects and between subjects, how much do they lend themselves to being webified – either in relation to being encapsulated on the web, being disseminated via the web or via the mechanism of using the web as a medium for collaboration? I will probably, I think, be looking at trust as seen through the lenses of either psychology, or perhaps sociology, and then perhaps, the economics around these sorts of transactions. This is all very uncertain and questioning at present – I will be asking more questions of myself and then hardening and refining these, and deciding on the appropriate subjects as I go along. Plenty of reflexive thinking about the process of deciding on research questions as well as more objective thinking on the sorts of questions to ask!

How can smaller museums have access to exhibition artifacts?

Main Concept

I believe that museums should be able to collaborate with other museums. Not only in their same country but also around the world.  The Museums Association (MA), along with The Museums, Libraries & Archives Council (MLA) in the UK, indicates that a museum should “enable people to explore collections for inspiration, learning and enjoyment.”

This means that the cultural motivation or agenda of the museum can be manipulated by different factors like: political, economical, location, etc…
The different agenda that the museum can follow, motivates me to approach the problem from different perspectives and disciplines.

The main two disciplines

Within Web Science, my main two disciplines will be:

• Museum Studies / Museology
• Information Technology for Organizations

Museum Studies

Through the museum studies, I will be attempting to explore the different museum methodologies but focusing mainly on the purposes of the museums and how the response from people. Peter Vergo mentioned in 1989

… too much about museum methods and too little about the purpose of the museum …
(Vergo, 1989: 3)

This indicates how it is not only important the methodological approach wich is directly related to Graphic Design and Visual Communication; which is my area of expertise.

The MLA indicates a basic typology of museums that can be able to target the different approach for the museum purpose within the UK.

• National museums
• Local authority museums
• University museums
• English Heritage museums
• Independent museums
• National Trust properties
• Regimental museums and armouries
• Unoccupied royal palaces

Being a Web Science research, this typology will have to be challenged and extended in order to globalize the museum typology throughout the world.

Through my research I will attempt to develop a new approach of how museums exhibit to their public by extending their exhibition material through different collaborative processes.

Information Technology for Organizations

Within the IT for Organizations, the technology developed can be able to adapted for the requirements of the institution or organization.  Through this discipline I believe I can target a different problematic of museum collaboration. Issues like: e-learning, disabled IT access, gaming, security system, etc..

A full technological approach with a sociological combination will allow the research to preview different areas of improvement. Areas in which museums, institutions and academics can be able to benefit from it.

My next step

Throughout the next days I will start to gather the essential bibliography for this research.  I will start posting the main theories and methods gathered from these books and start finding people that relate or can be able to collaborate with my research.  Ultimately I will like to find some institutions that are keen is promoting these kind of ideas to provide support to smaller museums that are struggling to get ‘out there’.

Hello all,

Apologies for my lack of blogging, I’ve been doing some reading over christmas (I trust everybody had a good christmas) and I wanted to share my thinking on the methodological approaches of both psychology and complexity. I think there is a fundemental issue here as to how we approach Webscience (are we going with Webscience, webscience Web Science or web science these days?) and the role of the different subject areas we’ve be learning about.

The traditional psychological approach shares much with the type of research we learn about in research methods. The positivist idea of isolating a variable and testing it either in the lab or via observation. Complexity differs as components (people, web pages) are affected by their interrelationships. So, isolating a particular part of the system for testing makes little sense as the effects of one variable in isolation say nothing about the collective effects.

If you watch the September Royal Society presentations, Nigel introduces webscience as a multidisciplinary area covering a whole range of subject from the structure of the web to humanities. In the complexity literature, however, there is a fundemental rejection of a positivist approach to dealing with complex systems. This is not to say there is no benefit to be gained, just that the two subject areas are tackling different questions;

Positivist experimentation – what happens at the interface between the web and the individual

Complexity – how does the network function as an entitiy in itself

So the question I have is what are we actually studying when we talk about webscience? Are we taking what we know of complex systems formation and then working out what effects that will have on people or, are we viewing people as part of the system in which case removing them to conduct experiments is impossible without altering the system.

My essay writing efforts have been along these lines – what are the methodological constraints of each approach and can they inform each other in a holistic explanation of the system…