4.5 Article

On the usefulness of graph-theoretic properties in the study of perceived numerosity

Journal

BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS
Volume 54, Issue 5, Pages 2381-2397

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.3758/s13428-021-01733-z

Keywords

Numerosity; Graph theory; Principal component analysis; Occupancy model

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Observers have the ability to estimate the quantity of visual elements, which is influenced by specific visual properties. Graph theory-based measures can effectively model human performance in estimating the number of elements, with some measures sensitive to local clustering and others sensitive to density.
Observers can quickly estimate the quantity of sets of visual elements. Many aspects of this ability have been studied and the underlying system has been called the Approximate Number Sense (Dehaene, 2011). Specific visual properties, such as size and clustering of the elements, can bias an estimate. For intermediate numerical quantities at low density (above five, but before texturization), human performance is predicted by a model based on the region of influence of elements (occupancy model: Allik & Tuulmets, 1991). For random 2D configurations we computed ten indices based on graph theory, and we compared them with the occupancy model: independence number, domination, connected components, local clustering coefficient, global clustering coefficient, random walk, eigenvector centrality, maximum clique, total degree of connectivity, and total edge length. We made comparisons across a range of parameters, and we varied the size of the region of influence around each element. The analysis of the pattern of correlations suggests two main groups of graph-based measures. The first group is sensitive to the presence of local clustering of elements, the second seems more sensitive to density and the way information spreads in graphs. Empirical work on perception of numerosity may benefit from comparing, or controlling for, these properties.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available