AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI@sri-unix.UUCP (06/08/83)
From: AIList (Kenneth Laws, Moderator) <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
AIList Digest Tuesday, 7 Jun 1983 Volume 1 : Issue 12
Today's Topics:
Usenet Admiministrivia
Kurzweil's Reading Machines (2)
Subjective Visual Phenomena (2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 6 Jun 83 08:51:47-PDT
From: Laws@SRI-AI <AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Usenet Admiministrivia
Andrew Knutsen@SRI-Unix, who controls the gateway between AIList and
the Usenet net.ai discussion, has developed new gateway software that
separates the AIList items and deletes those originating from Usenet
sites. I have modified the digesting software to pass through Usenet
Article-I.D. headers as flags for the gateway.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 1 Jun 83 21:04:41-PDT (Wed)
From: decvax!minow @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Reading machines -- an answer to the question
Article-I.D.: decvax.107
Kurzweil Computer Company, in Cambridge MA, makes several reading
machines, including one with a built-in voice synthesizer for
visually-handicapped users. There are about 20 scattered around in
New England public libraries.
They also make a "commercial" version that may be used as an
intelligent input device to a computer -- it reads several fonts and
is trainable. It is also fairly expensive.
Much of the theory behind the machine was explained in Kurzweil's MIT
thesis. (Sorry, don't have a reference.)
While there are a number of page readers on the market that read OCR-B
(which looks fairly reasonable), the Kurzweil seems to be unique in
that it can read many fonts.
Martin Minow decvax!minow
------------------------------
Date: 7 Jun 83 16:45:30 EDT
From: NUDEL.CL <NUDEL.CL@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Kurzweil's reading machine
[...]
There is a write-up on Kurzweil and his work in this week's U.S. News
and World Report - June 13, 1983 page 63. It mentions his reading
machine, plans for a reading interface for automatic input to
computers directly from the printed page without the need for key
punching, and a voice-activated word processor.
Bernard
------------------------------
Date: 2 Jun 83 4:16:33-PDT (Thu)
From: harpo!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!ucbcad!ucbesvax.t
turner @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Subjective Visual Phenomena
Article-I.D.: ucbcad.678
Talk of retinas, and composition of daemons for the "retina"
of a computer-resident intelligence, got me to thinking of my own
retina. I am not an expert in neuro-ocular phenomena, so if you are,
please bear with me. I am wondering if there are explanations for
some of the following perceptions:
1. One day some years ago I managed to walk on a railroad
rail for about 1/2 a mile. For at least fifteen minutes
afterward, there was a vertical band in my field of vision,
crossing the center, which seemed to be moving upward.
This band corresponded to the rail I had been staring at.
I was able to repeat this effect.
2. In a quiet, distraction-free, dimly lit environment, I am
able to look at an object against a uniform background,
and somehow make it blend in enough with its background
that it seems to disappear. This requires considerable
effort, and seldom lasts longer than a few seconds. Usually,
the object reappears when I try to focus on some feature
or detail that seems "behind" the object. I am fairly sure
that this is not simply a matter of coordinating both
eyes so that both blind-spots coincide over the image of
the object. It is definitely in the center of my vision.
The image also reappears if I move my eyes at all--and
since small eye movements are involuntary, this effect
suggests that these movements play a role in keeping
retinal responses flowing, whereas the image would
decay otherwise.
3. Recently, I have been playing a video game ("Quantum", Atari)
that has an interesting feature: there is an object which
moves around the screen (itself worth only 100 points)
that leaves behind images of itself that shrink down to
a point and disappear. Capturing (before disappearance)
these images is worth 300 points. When I play to make points
by capturing these shrinking images, there is a persistant
after-effect that is most apparent when trying to read: as
my eyes skip around a page, letters and words on it seem
to shrink. This does not happen when I play and ignore the
shrinking "particles", or capture them only incidentally.
The effect seems related to searching for and focussing on
these images for several minutes of play. It is often very
pronounced and distracting.
The human visual system seems to be educable at several levels.
Perhaps there are interactions between these levels that haven't been
explored yet.
Comments appreciated.
Michael Turner
ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner
------------------------------
Date: 3 Jun 83 9:04:29-PDT (Fri)
From: ihnp4!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!duke!mcnc!ncsu!fostel @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Visual After-effects
Article-I.D.: ncsu.2199
The effects described such as the railroad track and video after
effects are well known by psychologists, and indeed are one of the
tools used to study the levels and types of processing in the optic
system. Most introductory texts on the subject will include a few
pictures to stare at in certain ways to acheive some of types of
after effects you noted. I beleive Scientific American even gave
away a resubscription freebie on the subject a few (6?) years ago.
The earliest description of the phenomenon I know of (circa 1910) by
a reputable psychologist was from a fellow who had a small area of
his retna with a blind spot. (Was this Lashley?) He observed once at
a party, that when a person stood against a highly regular wallpaper
and their face was in his "spot" their head would be "removed" and
replaced by the Wallpaper Pattern! The visual system was simply
making its best guess of what should be simulated for those bad
receptors. A bit of experimenting later, it was shown that the
effect could be reproduced with anyone by simply fatiguing the
receptors at one spot (simulating a defect) by staring intently at
one object without blinking, moving the head or sacading the eyes.
If the level of fatigue is great enough and the background suitably
benighn and predictable, the object stared at will indeed disapear,
actually being replaced by the visual systems best guess for what the
fatigued cells would report if they were sending out a better signal.
My own experience with video games provides some confirmation of the
"modern" experience. I play Robotron, occassionally for several
hours (takes a while to recycle the 9,999,999 score) which involes
LOTS of little glowing things moving about, some of which must be
avoided and shot, and some of which must be "rescued". After such a
binge, I will see afterimages of the little Good guys I must rescue,
but never the bad killer robots. Now THAT is a high level of
processing in the optic system: it seems to be able to tell good from
bad!!
----GaryFostel----
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************