Cognitive Psychology seminars

Using videos from the Deepfake Detection Challenge (cf. Groh et al., 2021), we investigated human deepfake detection performance (DDP) in two unique observer groups: Super-Recognizers (SRs) and "normal" officers from within the 18K members of the Berlin Police. SRs were identified either via previously proposed lab-based procedures (Ramon, 2021) or the only existing tool for SR identification involving increasingly challenging, authentic forensic material: beSure® (Berlin Test For Super-Recognizer Identification; Ramon & Rjosk, 2022). Across two experiments we examined deepfake detection performance (DDP) in participants who judged single videos and pairs of videos in a 2AFC decision setting. We explored speed-accuracy trade-offs in DDP, compared DDP between lab-identified SRs and non-SRs, and police officers whose face identity processing skills had been extensively tested using challenging. In this talk I will discuss our surprising findings and argue that further work is needed too determine whether face identity processing is related to DDP or not.

One challenge in exploring the internal representation of faces is the lack of controlled stimuli transformations. Researchers are often limited to verbalizable transformations in the creation of a dataset. An alternative approach to verbalization for interpretability is finding image-based measures that allow us to quantify image transformations. In this study, we explore whether PCA could be used to create controlled transformations to a face by testing the effect of these transformations on human perceptual similarity and on computational differences in Gabor, Pixel and DNN spaces. We found that perceptual similarity and the three image-based spaces are linearly related, almost perfectly in the case of the DNN, with a correlation of 0.94. This provides a controlled way to alter the appearance of a face. In experiment 2, the effect of familiarity on the perception of multidimensional transformations was explored. Our findings show that there is a positive relationship between the number of components transformed and both the perceptual similarity and the same three image-based spaces used in experiment 1. Furthermore, we found that familiar faces are rated more similar overall than unfamiliar faces. That is, a change to a familiar face is perceived as making less difference than the exact same change to an unfamiliar face. The ability to quantify, and thus control, these transformations is a powerful tool in exploring the factors that mediate a change in perceived identity.

Not all individuals are equally competent at recognizing the faces they interact with. Revealing how the brains of different individuals support variations in this ability is a crucial step to develop an understanding of real-world human visual behaviour. In this talk, I will present findings from a large high-density EEG dataset (>100k trials of participants processing various stimulus categories) and computational approaches which aimed to characterise the brain representations behind real-world proficiency of “super-recognizers”—individuals at the top of face recognition ability spectrum. Using decoding analysis of time-resolved EEG patterns, we predicted with high precision the trial-by-trial activity of super-recognizers participants, and showed that evidence for face recognition ability variations is disseminated along early, intermediate and late brain processing steps. Computational modeling of the underlying brain activity uncovered two representational signatures supporting higher face recognition ability—i) mid-level visual & ii) semantic computations. Both components were dissociable in brain processing-time (the first around the N170, the last around the P600) and levels of computations (the first emerging from mid-level layers of visual Convolutional Neural Networks, the last from a semantic model characterising sentence descriptions of images). I will conclude by presenting ongoing analyses from a well-known case of acquired prosopagnosia (PS) using similar computational modeling of high-density EEG activity.

Even young children seem to have an early understanding of the world around them, and the people in it. Before children can reliably say "ball", "wall", or "Saul", they expect balls to not go through walls, and for Saul to go right for a ball (if there's no wall). What is the formal conceptual structure underlying this commonsense reasoning about objects and agents? I will raise several possibilities for models underlying core intuitive physics as a way of talking about models of core knowledge and intuitive theories more generally. In particular, I will present some recent ML work trying to capture early expectations about object solidly, cohesion, and permanence, that relies on a rough-derendering approach.