Bottom-Up Processes

Category Module 3

Files

Created @May 23, 2023 9:07 PM

Reminder

Status Open

URL

Updated @June 3, 2023 2:02 AM

The Three Major Classes of Bottom-Up Processes

Our ability to perceive rests largely on the information in the stimulus itself, the so-
called bottom-up or data driven processes

Bottom-up refers to the fact that the observer take small amounts of information
from the environment and combines it to form a percept

One direction only - stimulus → output

considered to operate reflexively and passively, occurring even when we are not
necessarily trying to identify something

Three Major Classes

1. Template Matching

2. Feature Analysis

3. Prototype Matching

Template Matching
built to perform pattern perception (e.g., barcode to data search to item
identification)

Bottom-Up Processes 1
 In this case of vision, the object would be registered as a proximal stimulus on the
retina

This stimulus, in its entirety, would be compared to templates in memory until a

match is found and the object can be named

This general principle operates with all our senses to allow

perception of smells, tastes, sounds, etc.

perception = physical match → stimulus + stored representation

Problems with Template Matching

does not do a good job at capturing the flexibility that is inherent in human
perception

proper identification requires an exact match - number of templates that must

be stored and searched would be incredibly large - like a large database

cannot explain how we recognize a new object, never encountered before

does not explain how we are able to deal with surface variation in stimuli (e.g.,
same sentence written in different penmanships)

Feature Analysis
objects are recognized by their component parts or features, and the manner in
which they are combined

letter perception

Selfridge’s Pandemonium Model

image demons - encodes stimulus into the model

feature demons - there’s one feature demon for every conceivable feature

represent only one feature each

cognitive demons - trained to listen for screaming from specific feature demons and
respond

Bottom-Up Processes 2
 decision demon - chooses the cognitive demon screaming the loudest and
announces the latter

→ simply an illustration of how features are recognized, not an indication we have these
demons in our head

Advantages to the Feature Analysis Model

more flexible - allows for the storage of features which could be common to many
objects, along with assembly instructions, reducing the number of templates stored

neurophysiological evidence to support this theoretical position - Hubel and Wiesel

have found evidence in visual cortices of cats and monkeys

human behavioural data: evidence consistent with the importance of features to

humans

Problems with the Feature Analysis Model

features are just like incomplete or mini templates

Bottom-Up Processes 3
 how can we identify features if we have never seen them before

how do we know what is a feature and what is not

Prototype Model
attempts to correct some of the problems associated with the rigidity of both
matching and feature analysis models

it requires that a holistic input be matched to a stored representation - match

does not have to be exact, but be a “best fit”

this accounts for the flexibility in human perception we find when you can
recognize all of these objects as the letter “M”

Summary
Template Matching

Feature Analysis

Prototype Models

Concept Check 3b1

In Selfridge’s pandemonium model, “demons” respond loudly or quietly depending
on what?

depending on the size or loudness of the stimulus (?)

depending on how confident they are → quality or clarity of the stimulus

Concept Check 3b2

How does a prototype matching model explain perception and recognition of
objects?

stimulus does not have to match the exact object - as long as it’s the “best fit”

a percept is compared to idealized representations in memory of every class of

information, and matched to the one

Bottom-Up Processes 4