Schyns Comms 16-18 lamberts latimer macdorman

From: Whitehouse Chantal (cw495@psy.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Apr 29 1998 - 14:27:34 BST


Hi Stevan,

Can I ask you about a couple of the Schyns commentaries this time?

First the commentry by Latimer, C. R. Could you please explain the
following,

>Whether or not the property of symmetry is captured or derivable
>from a pixel-based decomposition depends entirely on how the
>decomposition and its attributes are defined. For some
>decompositions and their attributes (Gibson's 1969 graphemic
>analysis which does not specify locations of parts within
>characters) symmetry will not be derivable directly from the parts.
>For other decompositions and their attributes, (Latimer, Joung &
>Stevens, 1994; Sejnowski, Kinker & Hinton, 1986) symmetry will be
>derivable.

At the end of his commentary he writes,

>the flexibility proposed by the authors may lie in the ability of
>the brain to adopt efficient and context-sensitive decompositions
>rather than attempting to create or derive features from a fixed
>decomposition .

What does he mean by "efficient and context-sensitive
decompositions" ?



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 13 2001 - 16:23:20 GMT