Representation is representation of similarities
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):449-467 (1998)
| Abstract | Intelligent systems are faced with the problem of securing a principled (ideally, veridical) relationship between the world and its internal representation. I propose a unified approach to visual representation, addressing both the needs of superordinate and basic-level categorization and of identification of specific instances of familiar categories. According to the proposed theory, a shape is represented by its similarity to a number of reference shapes, measured in a high-dimensional space of elementary features. This amounts to embedding the stimulus in a low-dimensional proximal shape space. That space turns out to support representation of distal shape similarities which is veridical in the sense of Shepard's (1968) notion of second-order isomorphism (i.e., correspondence between distal and proximal similarities among shapes, rather than between distal shapes and their proximal representations). Furthermore, a general expression for similarity between two stimuli, based on comparisons to reference shapes, can be used to derive models of perceived similarity ranging from continuous, symmetric, and hierarchical, as in the multidimensional scaling models (Shepard, 1980), to discrete and non-hierarchical, as in the general contrast models (Tversky, 1977; Shepard and Arabie, 1979) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,672 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesAdam Toon (2010). Models as Make-Believe. In Roman Frigg & Matthew Hunter (eds.), Beyond Mimesis and Convention: Representation in Art and Science. Boston Studies in Philosophy of Science.
Arthur B. Markman & Takashi Yamauchi (1998). Boundary Conditions and the Need for Multiple Forms of Representation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):477-478.
Nathan Intrator (1998). Representation of Similarities and Correspondence Structure. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):475-475.
Mauricio Suarez (2003). Scientific Representation: Against Similarity and Isomorphism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 17 (3):225-244.
Hannes Eisler (1998). Distal Similarity, Shape Referents, Subjective World, and Redundancy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):470-470.
Martin Jüttner (1998). Representation of Similarities – a Psychometric but Not an Explanatory Concept for Categorization. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):475-476.
Philip J. Benson (1998). Seeing Wood Because of the Trees? A Case of Failure in Reverse-Engineering. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):468-468.
Shimon Edelman (1998). Shape Representation by Second-Order Isomorphism and the Chorus Model: SIC. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):484-493.
Shimon Edelman & Sharon Duvdevani-Bar (1997). Similarity-Based Viewspace Interpolation and the Categorization of 3D Objects. In Proc. Edinburgh Workshop on Similarity and Categorization.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads30 ( #40,824 of 549,065 )Recent downloads (6 months)18 ( #3,300 of 549,065 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
