Novelty detection: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Reference edited with ProveIt #proveit | Alter: url, template type. URLs might have been anonymized. Add: s2cid, pmc, pmid, pages, issue, volume, journal, year, title, doi, authors 1-4. Removed proxy/dead URL that duplicated identifier. Changed bare reference to CS1/2. | Use this tool. Report bugs. | #UCB_Gadget Tags: ProveIt edit Reverted |
accuracy of the information Tags: Reverted Visual edit |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Novelty detection''' is the [[Mechanism of action|mechanism]] by which an [[intelligent]] [[organism]] is able to identify an incoming [[Stimulus (physiology)|sensory pattern]] as being hitherto unknown. If the pattern is sufficiently [[Salience (neuroscience)|salient]] or associated with a high positive or strong negative [[Expected utility hypothesis|utility]], it will be given computational resources for effective future processing. |
'''Novelty detection''' is the [[Mechanism of action|mechanism]] by which an [[intelligent]] [[organism]] is able to identify an incoming [[Stimulus (physiology)|sensory pattern]] as being hitherto unknown. If the pattern is sufficiently [[Salience (neuroscience)|salient]] or associated with a high positive or strong negative [[Expected utility hypothesis|utility]], it will be given computational resources for effective future processing. |
||
She glanced up into the sky to watch the clouds taking shape. First, she saw a dog. Next, it was an elephant. Finally, she saw a giant umbrella and at that moment the rain began to pour. |
|||
She considered the birds to be her friends. She'd put out food for them each morning and then she'd watch as they came to the feeders to gorge themselves for the day. She wondered what they would do if something ever happened to her. Would they miss the meals she provided if she failed to put out the food one morning? |
|||
I guess we could discuss the implications of the phrase "meant to be." That is if we wanted to drown ourselves in a sea of backwardly referential semantics and other mumbo-jumbo. Maybe such a discussion would result in the determination that "meant to be" is exactly as meaningless a phrase as it seems to be, and that none of us is actually meant to be doing anything at all. But that's my existential underpants underpinnings showing. It's the way the cookie crumbles. And now I want a cookie. |
|||
He was after the truth. At least, that's what he told himself. He believed it, but any rational person on the outside could see he was lying to himself. It was apparent he was really only after his own truth that he'd already decided and was after this truth because the facts didn't line up with the truth he wanted. So he continued to tell everyone he was after the truth oblivious to the real truth sitting right in front of him. |
|||
Love isn't always a ray of sunshine. That's what the older girls kept telling her when she said she had found the perfect man. She had thought this was simply bitter talk on their part since they had been unable to find true love like hers. But now she had to face the fact that they may have been right. Love may not always be a ray of sunshine. That is unless they were referring to how the sun can burn. |
|||
The principle is long known in [[neurophysiology]], with roots in the [[orienting response]] research by [[Eugene Sokolov|E. N. Sokolov]]<ref name="Sokolov, E.N 1960, pp. 187">Sokolov, E. N., (1960). Neuronal models and the orienting reflex, In ''The Central Nervous System and Behavior'', Mary A.B. Brazier, ed. NY: JosiahMacy, Jr. Foundation, pp. 187–276</ref> in the 1950s. The reverse phenomenon is [[habituation]], i.e., the phenomenon that known patterns yield a less marked response. Early neural modeling attempts were by Yehuda Salu.<ref name="Yehuda Salu, 1988">{{cite journal | url=https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0303-2647%2888%2990003-2 | doi=10.1016/0303-2647(88)90003-2 | title=Models of neural novelty detectors, with similarities to cerebral cortex | year=1988 | last1=Salu | first1=Yehuda | journal=Biosystems | volume=21 | issue=2 | pages=99–113 | pmid=3355886 }}</ref> An increasing body of knowledge has been collected concerning the corresponding mechanisms in the brain.<ref>Tiitinen, H., May, P., Reinikainen K. & Näätänen, R. (1994). ''[https://www.nature.com/articles/372090a0 Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by pre-attentive sensory memory]'', Nature, 372, pp. 90–92.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | pmc=3529001 | year=2011 | last1=Duncan | first1=K. | last2=Ketz | first2=N. | last3=Inati | first3=S. | last4=Davachi | first4=L. | title=Evidence for area CA1 as a match/Mismatch detector: A high-resolution fMRI study of the human hippocampus | journal=Hippocampus | volume=22 | issue=3 | pages=389–398 | doi=10.1002/hipo.20933 | pmid=21484934 }}</ref> In technology, the principle became important for [[radar detection]] methods during the Cold War, where unusual aircraft-reflection patterns could indicate an attack by a new type of aircraft. Today, the phenomenon plays an important role in [[machine learning]] and [[data science]], where the corresponding methods are known as [[anomaly detection |anomaly detection or outlier detection]]. An extensive methodological overview is given by Markou and Singh.<ref>{{cite journal | url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.018 | doi=10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.018 | title=Novelty detection: A review—part 1: Statistical approaches | year=2003 | last1=Markou | first1=Markos | last2=Singh | first2=Sameer | journal=Signal Processing | volume=83 | issue=12 | pages=2481–2497 | s2cid=17490415 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.019 | doi=10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.019 | title=Novelty detection: A review—part 2 | year=2003 | last1=Markou | first1=Markos | last2=Singh | first2=Sameer | journal=Signal Processing | volume=83 | issue=12 | pages=2499–2521 }}</ref> |
The principle is long known in [[neurophysiology]], with roots in the [[orienting response]] research by [[Eugene Sokolov|E. N. Sokolov]]<ref name="Sokolov, E.N 1960, pp. 187">Sokolov, E. N., (1960). Neuronal models and the orienting reflex, In ''The Central Nervous System and Behavior'', Mary A.B. Brazier, ed. NY: JosiahMacy, Jr. Foundation, pp. 187–276</ref> in the 1950s. The reverse phenomenon is [[habituation]], i.e., the phenomenon that known patterns yield a less marked response. Early neural modeling attempts were by Yehuda Salu.<ref name="Yehuda Salu, 1988">{{cite journal | url=https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0303-2647%2888%2990003-2 | doi=10.1016/0303-2647(88)90003-2 | title=Models of neural novelty detectors, with similarities to cerebral cortex | year=1988 | last1=Salu | first1=Yehuda | journal=Biosystems | volume=21 | issue=2 | pages=99–113 | pmid=3355886 }}</ref> An increasing body of knowledge has been collected concerning the corresponding mechanisms in the brain.<ref>Tiitinen, H., May, P., Reinikainen K. & Näätänen, R. (1994). ''[https://www.nature.com/articles/372090a0 Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by pre-attentive sensory memory]'', Nature, 372, pp. 90–92.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | pmc=3529001 | year=2011 | last1=Duncan | first1=K. | last2=Ketz | first2=N. | last3=Inati | first3=S. | last4=Davachi | first4=L. | title=Evidence for area CA1 as a match/Mismatch detector: A high-resolution fMRI study of the human hippocampus | journal=Hippocampus | volume=22 | issue=3 | pages=389–398 | doi=10.1002/hipo.20933 | pmid=21484934 }}</ref> In technology, the principle became important for [[radar detection]] methods during the Cold War, where unusual aircraft-reflection patterns could indicate an attack by a new type of aircraft. Today, the phenomenon plays an important role in [[machine learning]] and [[data science]], where the corresponding methods are known as [[anomaly detection |anomaly detection or outlier detection]]. An extensive methodological overview is given by Markou and Singh.<ref>{{cite journal | url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.018 | doi=10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.018 | title=Novelty detection: A review—part 1: Statistical approaches | year=2003 | last1=Markou | first1=Markos | last2=Singh | first2=Sameer | journal=Signal Processing | volume=83 | issue=12 | pages=2481–2497 | s2cid=17490415 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.019 | doi=10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.019 | title=Novelty detection: A review—part 2 | year=2003 | last1=Markou | first1=Markos | last2=Singh | first2=Sameer | journal=Signal Processing | volume=83 | issue=12 | pages=2499–2521 }}</ref> |
||
Revision as of 10:05, 7 September 2023
Novelty detection is the mechanism by which an intelligent organism is able to identify an incoming sensory pattern as being hitherto unknown. If the pattern is sufficiently salient or associated with a high positive or strong negative utility, it will be given computational resources for effective future processing.
She glanced up into the sky to watch the clouds taking shape. First, she saw a dog. Next, it was an elephant. Finally, she saw a giant umbrella and at that moment the rain began to pour. She considered the birds to be her friends. She'd put out food for them each morning and then she'd watch as they came to the feeders to gorge themselves for the day. She wondered what they would do if something ever happened to her. Would they miss the meals she provided if she failed to put out the food one morning? I guess we could discuss the implications of the phrase "meant to be." That is if we wanted to drown ourselves in a sea of backwardly referential semantics and other mumbo-jumbo. Maybe such a discussion would result in the determination that "meant to be" is exactly as meaningless a phrase as it seems to be, and that none of us is actually meant to be doing anything at all. But that's my existential underpants underpinnings showing. It's the way the cookie crumbles. And now I want a cookie. He was after the truth. At least, that's what he told himself. He believed it, but any rational person on the outside could see he was lying to himself. It was apparent he was really only after his own truth that he'd already decided and was after this truth because the facts didn't line up with the truth he wanted. So he continued to tell everyone he was after the truth oblivious to the real truth sitting right in front of him. Love isn't always a ray of sunshine. That's what the older girls kept telling her when she said she had found the perfect man. She had thought this was simply bitter talk on their part since they had been unable to find true love like hers. But now she had to face the fact that they may have been right. Love may not always be a ray of sunshine. That is unless they were referring to how the sun can burn.
The principle is long known in neurophysiology, with roots in the orienting response research by E. N. Sokolov[1] in the 1950s. The reverse phenomenon is habituation, i.e., the phenomenon that known patterns yield a less marked response. Early neural modeling attempts were by Yehuda Salu.[2] An increasing body of knowledge has been collected concerning the corresponding mechanisms in the brain.[3][4] In technology, the principle became important for radar detection methods during the Cold War, where unusual aircraft-reflection patterns could indicate an attack by a new type of aircraft. Today, the phenomenon plays an important role in machine learning and data science, where the corresponding methods are known as anomaly detection or outlier detection. An extensive methodological overview is given by Markou and Singh.[5][6]
See also
References
- ^ Sokolov, E. N., (1960). Neuronal models and the orienting reflex, In The Central Nervous System and Behavior, Mary A.B. Brazier, ed. NY: JosiahMacy, Jr. Foundation, pp. 187–276
- ^ Salu, Yehuda (1988). "Models of neural novelty detectors, with similarities to cerebral cortex". Biosystems. 21 (2): 99–113. doi:10.1016/0303-2647(88)90003-2. PMID 3355886.
- ^ Tiitinen, H., May, P., Reinikainen K. & Näätänen, R. (1994). Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by pre-attentive sensory memory, Nature, 372, pp. 90–92.
- ^ Duncan, K.; Ketz, N.; Inati, S.; Davachi, L. (2011). "Evidence for area CA1 as a match/Mismatch detector: A high-resolution fMRI study of the human hippocampus". Hippocampus. 22 (3): 389–398. doi:10.1002/hipo.20933. PMC 3529001. PMID 21484934.
- ^ Markou, Markos; Singh, Sameer (2003). "Novelty detection: A review—part 1: Statistical approaches". Signal Processing. 83 (12): 2481–2497. doi:10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.018. S2CID 17490415.
- ^ Markou, Markos; Singh, Sameer (2003). "Novelty detection: A review—part 2". Signal Processing. 83 (12): 2499–2521. doi:10.1016/j.sigpro.2003.07.019.