home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Illusion - Is Seeing Really Believing?
/
Illusion - Is Seeing Really Believing (1998)(Marshall Media)[Mac-PC].iso
/
pc
/
illusion
/
hub_fie.cxt
/
00253_Field_frep70.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1996-12-30
|
2KB
|
82 lines
This is where we are, in
1995, in the step-by-step
analysis of the visual path. In
terms of numbers of synapses
(perhaps eight or ten) and
complexity of transformations,
it may seem a long way from the
rods and cones in the retina to
areas MT or visual area 2 in the
cortex, but it is surely a far
longer way from such processes
as orientation tuning, end-
stopping, disparity tuning, or
color opponency to the
recognition of any of the shapes
that we perceive in our
everyday life. We are far from
understanding the perception
of objects, even such
comparatively simple ones as a
circle, a triangle, or the letter
A--indeed, we are far from even
being able to come up with
plausible hypotheses.
We should not be
particularly surprised or
disconcerted over our relative
ignorance in the face of such
mysteries. Those who work in
the field of artificial
intelligence (AI) cannot design
a machine that begins to rival
the brain at carrying out such
special tasks as processing the
written word, driving a car
along a road, or distinguishing
faces. They have, however,
shown that the theoretical
difficulties in accomplishing
any of these tasks are
formidable. It is not that the
difficulties cannot be solved--
the brain clearly has solved
them--but rather that the
methods the brain applies
cannot be simple: in the lingo
of AI, the problems are
"nontrivial". So the brain
solves nontrivial problems. The
remarkable thing is that it
solves not just two or three but
thousands of them.
In the question period
following a lecture, a sensory
physiologist or psychologist
soon gets used to being asked
what the best guess is as to how
objects are recognized. Do cells
continue to become more and
more specialized at more and
more central levels, so that at
some stage we can expect to
find cells so specialized that
they respond to one single
person's face--say, one's
grandmother's? This notion,
called the grandmother cell
theory, is hard to entertain
seriously. Would we expect to
find separate cells for
grandmother smiling,
grandmother weeping, or
grandmother sewing? Separate
cells for the concept or
definition of grandmother:
one's mother's or father's
mother? And if we did have
grandmother cells, then what?
Where would they project?