David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Minds and Machines 5 (1):45-68 (1995)
It is proposed to conceive of representation as an emergent phenomenon that is supervenient on patterns of activity of coarsely tuned and highly redundant feature detectors. The computational underpinnings of the outlined concept of representation are (1) the properties of collections of overlapping graded receptive fields, as in the biological perceptual systems that exhibit hyperacuity-level performance, and (2) the sufficiency of a set of proximal distances between stimulus representations for the recovery of the corresponding distal contrasts between stimuli, as in multidimensional scaling. The present preliminary study appears to indicate that this concept of representation is computationally viable, and is compatible with psychological and neurobiological data.
|Keywords||Computation Physics Representation Science Vision|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Jerry A. Fodor (1981). Representations: Philosophical Essays on the Foundations of Cognitive Science. MIT Press.
W. V. Quine (1960). Word and Object. The MIT Press.
W. V. Quine (1969). Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. Columbia University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Michael J. Tarr & Heinrich H. Bülthoff (1998). Image-Based Object Recognition in Man, Monkey and Machine. Cognition 67 (1-2):1-20.
Christopher Gauker (2012). Perception Without Propositions. Philosophical Perspectives 26 (1):19-50.
Michael J. Tarr & Isabel Gauthier (1998). Do Viewpoint-Dependent Mechanisms Generalize Across Members of a Class? Cognition 67 (1-2):73-110.
Walter J. Freeman (1995). The Hebbian Paradigm Reintegrated: Local Reverberations as Internal Representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18 (4):631.
Shimon Edelman (1997). Computational Theories of Object Recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1 (8):296-304.
Similar books and articles
M. J. Tovée (1998). A Neural Basis for the Chorus Model? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):481-481.
Cyril Latimer (1998). The Chorus Scheme: Representation or Isomorphism, Holistic or Analytic? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):476-477.
Shimon Edelman (1998). Shape Representation by Second-Order Isomorphism and the Chorus Model: SIC. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):484-493.
Andrew R. Bailey (1994). Representations Versus Regularities: Does Computation Require Representation? Eidos: Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad Del Norte 12 (1):47-58.
Todd M. Bailey (2005). Rules Work on One Representation; Similarity Compares Two Representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):16-16.
William S. Robinson (1999). Representation and Cognitive Explanation. In Understanding Representation in the Cognitive Sciences: Does Representation Need Reality, Riegler. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Pub
Brendan Kitts (1999). Representation Operators and Computation. Minds and Machines 9 (2):223-240.
James R. Williamson (1998). How is Representation Learned? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):484-484.
Mauricio Suarez (2003). Scientific Representation: Against Similarity and Isomorphism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 17 (3):225-244.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #82,608 of 1,780,586 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #204,197 of 1,780,586 )
How can I increase my downloads?