Learning 10000 pictures

Abstract

Four experiments are reported which examined memory capacity and retrieval speed for pictures and for words. Single-trial learning tasks were employed throughout, with memory performance assessed by forced-choice recognition, recall measures or choice reaction-time tasks. The main experimental findings were: (1) memory capacity, as a function of the amount of material presented, follows a general power law with a characteristic exponent for each task; (2) pictorial material obeys this power law and shows an overall superiority to verbal material. The capacity of recognition memory for pictures is almost limitless, when measured under appropriate conditions; (3) when the recognition task is made harder by using more alternatives, memory capacity stays constant and the superiority of pictures is maintained; (4) picture memory also exceeds verbal memory in terms of verbal recall; comparable recognition/recall ratios are obtained for pictures, words and nonsense syllables; (5) verbal memory shows a higher retrieval speed than picture memory, as inferred from reaction-time measures. Both types of material obey a power law, when reaction-time is measured for various sizes of learning set, and both show very rapid rates of memory search. From a consideration of the experimental results and other data it is concluded that the superiority of the pictorial mode in recognition and free recall learning tasks is well established and cannot be attributed to methodological artifact.

Universal Memory Mechanism for Familiarity Recognition and Identification

“…al., 2005)] and some of them also account for the enormous memory capacity observed by Standing (1973) (Bogacz et al, 2001;Bogacz and Brown, 2003). Here, we propose a particularly simple neural system, endowed with conservative Hebbian synaptic plasticity, capable of accounting for the monkey psychophysics experiments we present and for the related findings of Standing.…”

“…How can the traces preserved in the synapses distinguish first from second presentations of a stimulus [as found in humans by Standing (1973) and by ourselves, above, in monkeys], without delay activity? Figure 5A (red curve) presents stationary state spike rates during stimulation, averaged over the active neurons responsive to each stimulus, after learning 200 stimuli, as a function of stimulus number; no.…”

“…FP rates for images of the one-back trial are somewhat higher for novel than for trained images. Given the large capacity of familiarity memory [implied by Standing (1973)], in absence of some intertrial reset mechanism, one would expect a FP rate for novel images seen in any previous trial as high as the hit rate in the same trial (i.e., ϳ100%). The much lower FP rate suggests that some intertrial reset mechanism must be implemented in this circumstance.…”

“…This signal is nonselective but would generate a proper behavioral response: The rate evoked by the test (repeat) image can be compared with a threshold (in a one-way decision, as in the behavioral results, above), or a comparison can be made between two rates in a two-alternative forced-choice test (Standing, 1973). There is a selective component underlying the response to a familiar image, but it is attributable to the stimulus presented, and would be there also on first presentation of an image.…”

The Relationship Between Online Visual Representation of a Scene and Long-Term Scene Memory.

“…With the exception of the currently attended object (or very recently attended objects), scene memory is proposed to be schematic, retaining the gist of the scene and the spatial layout of the scene (i.e., the spatial configuration of surfaces and object positions), but not retaining episodic visual details from local objects. Because these views hold that no robust representation of the visual details of a scene is constructed during online viewing, researchers have necessarily concluded that high capacity, robust LTM in the picture memory literature (e.g., Nickerson, 1968;Standing, 1973) must have been based on the retention of abstract scene gist or layout information (Chun, 2003;Simons, 1996;Simons & Levin, 1997). Hollingworth and Henderson (2002) sought to resolve the apparent discrepancy between claims of visual transience in the change blindness literature and evidence of high capacity, robust memory for pictures.…”