Human efficiency for classifying natural versus random text
Related Experiment Videos
Peter Neri1, Alicia Liu, Dennis M Levi
1Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, United Kingdom. pn@white.stanford.edu
Abstract:
Humans are remarkably efficient at processing natural text. We quantified efficiency for discriminating a sample of meaningful text from a sample of random text by disrupting the meaningful sample, and measuring how much disruption human readers can tolerate before the two samples become indistinguishable. We performed these measurements for a wide range of conditions, involving samples of different lengths and containing letters, words or Chinese characters. We then compared human performance to the best possible performance achieved by a Bayesian estimator under the conditions in which we tested our participants, and in so doing we determined their absolute efficiency. Values were mostly in the range 5-40%, in agreement with reported efficiencies for many visual tasks. Although not intended as a veridical model of human processing, we found that the Bayesian model captured some (but not all) aspects of how humans classified text in our tasks and conditions.
Related Concept Videos
Random and Systematic Errors
Random and Systematic Errors
Classification of Systems-I
Homogeneity dictates that if an input x(t) is multiplied by a constant c, the output y(t) is multiplied by the same constant. Mathematically, this is expressed as:
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
Classification of Signals
A continuous-time signal holds a value at every instant in time, representing information seamlessly. In contrast, a discrete-time signal holds values only at specific moments, often denoted as x(n), where...
Classification of Systems-II