![]() ![]() Gorilla opacity increased from 50 to 100%, then back down to 50% over the course of 5 frames within the chest CT scan. We compared the performance of radiologists to naïve observers. In an homage to the Simons and Chabris’ (1999) study, we made that item a gorilla. ![]() Moreover, while Potchen showed that radiologists could miss the unexpected absence of a stimulus, we wanted to know if they radiologists would miss a readily detectable, highly anomalous item while performing a task within their realm of expertise. This degree of control may ameliorate the effects of IB because the searcher is able to return and further examine any images that appear unusual. From the point of view of IB, these situations are interesting because the observer is actively interacting with the stimulus in this case, scrolling through a stack of images through the lung. It is therefore important to study whether IB occurs in these modern imaging modalities. Modern medical imaging technologies like Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computed Tomography (CT) and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) are increasingly complex: the single image of a chest x-ray has been replaced with hundreds of slices of chest CT scan. Finally, a recent observational case report documented a case where a misplaced femoral line was not detected by variety of health care professional who evaluated the case ( Lum, Fairbanks, Pennington, & Zwemer, 2005).īoth of these instances of apparent IB in the medical setting occurred in single-slice medical images. On the other hand, when Potchen (2006) showed radiologists chest x-rays with a clavicle (collarbone) removed, roughly 60% of radiologists failed to notice when they were reviewing cases as if for an annual exam. For example, Memmert ( Memmert, 2006) found a decreased the rate of IB for basketball players who were asked to count the number of basketball passes in an artificial game. Does inattentional blindness (IB) still occur when the observers are experts, highly trained on the primary task? There is some evidence that expertise mitigates the effect. Despite having walked through the center of the scene, the gorilla is not reported by a substantial portion of the observers ( ). This phenomenon of “sustained inattentional blindness” is best known from Simons and Chabris’ (1999) study in which observers attend to a ball-passing game while a human in a gorilla suit wanders through the game. The software will continue to be far from perfect for the foreseeable future.When engaged in a demanding task, attention can act like a set of blinders, making it possible for salient stimuli to pass unnoticed right in front of our eyes ( Neisser & Becklen, 1975). These points are not to shame Google, Nikon, or HP, which are companies that have no malicious intent behind their facial recognition software. However, it quickly started tracking a white woman's face as soon as she walked in front of the camera. Although it was designed to follow the faces of all users, it couldn't recognize the African-American man moving in front of it. As a Japanese company, Nikon apparently neglected to design its camera with Asian eyes in mind.Ī few months after the Nikon controversy, a Youtube video about an HP MediaSmart Computer went viral. ![]() Furthermore, many Native American dancer photos were tagged with the word “costume,” which added great insult to the community.īack in 2009, Nikon's face-detection cameras were accused of being “racist.” Many times, when an Asian face was photographed, a message flashed across the screen asking, "Did someone blink?” - even when their eyes were wide open. This past May, Flickr's facial recognition software labeled both black and white people as “animals” and “apes” (these tags were promptly removed). ![]() This is not the first time that facial recognition software, which is based on machine learning and computer vision, has messed up its identification of people. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |