Jetzschke Simon, Ernst Marc O, Froehlich Julia, Boeddeker Norbert
Department of Biology, Cognitive Neuroscience, Bielefeld UniversityBielefeld, Germany.
Cognitive Interaction Technology-Cluster of Excellence, Bielefeld UniversityBielefeld, Germany.
Front Behav Neurosci. 2017 Jul 18;11:132. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00132. eCollection 2017.
Memories of places often include landmark cues, i.e., information provided by the spatial arrangement of distinct objects with respect to the target location. To study how humans combine landmark information for navigation, we conducted two experiments: To this end, participants were either provided with auditory landmarks while walking in a large sports hall or with visual landmarks while walking on a virtual-reality treadmill setup. We found that participants cannot reliably locate their home position due to ambiguities in the spatial arrangement when only one or two uniform landmarks provide cues with respect to the target. With three visual landmarks that look alike, the task is solved without ambiguity, while audio landmarks need to play three unique sounds for a similar performance. This reduction in ambiguity through integration of landmark information from 1, 2, and 3 landmarks is well modeled using a probabilistic approach based on maximum likelihood estimation. Unlike any deterministic model of human navigation (based e.g., on distance or angle information), this probabilistic model predicted both the precision and accuracy of the human homing performance. To further examine how landmark cues are integrated we introduced systematic conflicts in the visual landmark configuration between training of the home position and tests of the homing performance. The participants integrated the spatial information from each landmark near-optimally to reduce spatial variability. When the conflict becomes big, this integration breaks down and precision is sacrificed for accuracy. That is, participants return again closer to the home position, because they start ignoring the deviant third landmark. Relying on two instead of three landmarks, however, goes along with responses that are scattered over a larger area, thus leading to higher variability. To model the breakdown of integration with increasing conflict, the probabilistic model based on a simple Gaussian distribution used for Experiment 1 needed a slide extension in from of a mixture of Gaussians. All parameters for the Mixture Model were fixed based on the homing performance in the baseline condition which contained a single landmark. from the 1-Landmark Condition. This way we found that the Mixture Model could predict the integration performance and its breakdown with no additional free parameters. Overall these data suggest that humans use similar optimal probabilistic strategies in visual and auditory navigation, integrating landmark information to improve homing precision and balance homing precision with homing accuracy.
对地点的记忆通常包含地标线索,即由不同物体相对于目标位置的空间排列所提供的信息。为了研究人类如何整合地标信息进行导航,我们进行了两项实验:为此,参与者要么在大型体育馆行走时被提供听觉地标,要么在虚拟现实跑步机装置上行走时被提供视觉地标。我们发现,当只有一个或两个统一的地标相对于目标提供线索时,由于空间排列的模糊性,参与者无法可靠地定位他们的起始位置。有三个看起来相似的视觉地标时,任务能够毫无歧义地解决,而音频地标需要播放三种独特的声音才能有类似的表现。通过整合来自1个、2个和3个地标的地标信息来减少模糊性,这可以使用基于最大似然估计的概率方法很好地建模。与任何人类导航的确定性模型(例如基于距离或角度信息)不同,这个概率模型预测了人类归巢表现的精度和准确性。为了进一步研究地标线索是如何整合的,我们在起始位置训练和归巢表现测试之间的视觉地标配置中引入了系统性冲突。参与者近乎最优地整合了来自每个地标的空间信息,以减少空间变异性。当冲突变得很大时,这种整合就会瓦解,为了准确性而牺牲精度。也就是说参与者再次回到更接近起始位置的地方了,因为他们开始忽略偏离的第三个地标。然而,依靠两个而不是三个地标会导致反应分散在更大的区域,从而导致更高的变异性。为了模拟随着冲突增加整合的瓦解,基于用于实验1的简单高斯分布的概率模型需要在高斯混合模型之前进行扩展。混合模型的所有参数都基于包含单个地标(来自单地标条件)的基线条件下的归巢表现进行固定。通过这种方式,我们发现混合模型可以在没有额外自由参数的情况下预测整合表现及其瓦解。总体而言,这些数据表明人类在视觉和听觉导航中使用类似的最优概率策略,整合地标信息以提高归巢精度,并在归巢精度和归巢准确性之间取得平衡。