A returning idea among some Bayesians in research on human visual perceptual organization is that the surprisal of something (i.e., the negative logarithm of its probability) expresses its complexity (i.e., the length of its shortest description). Bayes’ rule is a powerful modeling tool and descriptive simplicity is a rich concept, but this idea is wishful thinking at best: If true, it would unify the simplicity and likelihood principles, which reflect two traditionally opposed schools of thought on perceptual organization. Some rapprochement between the two principles can certainly be discerned, but the aforementioned idea lacks formal underpinning and confounds otherwise perfectly good ideas. Here, this idea is revisited and its latest version is debunked step by step. In addition, I argue that its likely origin lies, inadvertently, in a standard Bayesian textbook: The author made (a) a pivotal mistake and (b) a compelling argument that was overinterpreted by others.
AttneaveF. (1954) Some informational aspects of visual perception. Psychological Review61: 183–193. doi:10.1037/h0054663.
2.
AttneaveF. (1955) Symmetry, information, and memory for patterns. American Journal of Psychology68: 209–222. doi:10.2307/1418892.
3.
BalasubramanianV. (2005) MDL, Bayesian inference, and the geometry of the space of probability distributions. In: GrünwaldP. D.MyungI. J.PittM. A. (eds) Advances in minimum description length: Theory and applications, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 81–99.
4.
BaxterR. A.OliverJ. J. (1994) MDL and MML: Similarities and differences (Tech Report 207), Australia: Monash University.
5.
BayesT.PriceR. (1763) An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Philosophical Transactions53: 370–418. doi:10.1098/rstl.1763.0053.
6.
BiedermanI. (1987) Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review94: 115–147. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.2.115.
7.
BoselieF.LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (1986) A test of the minimum principle requires a perceptual coding system. Perception15: 331–354. doi:10.1068/p150331.
8.
ChaterN. (1996) Reconciling simplicity and likelihood principles in perceptual organization. Psychological Review103: 566–581. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.566.
9.
CohenJ. (2015) Perceptual representation, veridicality, and the interface theory of perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review22: 1512–1518. doi:10.3758/s13423-014-0782-3.
10.
FeldmanJ. (2009) Bayes and the simplicity principle in perception. Psychological Review116: 875–887. doi:10.1037/a0017144.
11.
FeldmanJ. (2013) Tuning your priors to the world. Topics in Cognitive Science5: 13–34. doi:10.1111/tops.12003.
12.
FeldmanJ. (2016) The simplicity principle in perception and cognition. WIREs Cognitive Science7: 330–340. doi:10.1002/wcs.1406.
13.
FeldmanJ.SinghM. (2006) Bayesian estimation of the shape skeleton. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA103: 18014–18019. doi:10.1073/pnas.0608811103.
GarnerW. R. (1962) Uncertainty and structure as psychological concepts, New York, NY: Wiley.
16.
GigerenzerG.MurrayD. J. (1987) Cognition as intuitive statistics, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17.
FristonK. (2010) The free-energy principle: A unified brain theory?Nature Reviews Neuroscience11: 127–138. doi:10.1038/nrn2787.
18.
FristonK.ChuC.Mourão-MirandaJ.HulmeO.ReesG.PennyW.AshburnerJ. (2008) Bayesian decoding of brain images. NeuroImage39: 181–205. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.08.013.
19.
HartleyR. V. L. (1928) Transmission of information. Bell System Technical Journal7: 535–563. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1928.tb01236.x.
20.
HochbergJ. E.McAlisterE. (1953) A quantitative approach to figural “goodness”. Journal of Experimental Psychology46: 361–364. doi:10.1037/h0055809.
21.
Hochberg, J. E., & Brooks, V. (1960). The psychophysics of form: Reversible-perspective drawings of spatial objects. American Journal of Psychology, 73, 337–354. doi:10.2307/1420172.
22.
HoffmanD. D. (1996) What do we mean by “The structure of the world”? In: KnillD. C.RichardsW. (eds) Perception as Bayesian inference, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, pp. 219–221.
23.
HoffmanD. D.SinghM.PrakashC. (2015) The interface theory of perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review22: 1480–1506. doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0890-8.
24.
Knill, D. C., & Richards, W. (Eds.). (1996). Perception as Bayesian inference. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
KöhlerW. (1920) Die physischen Gestalten in Ruhe und im stationären Zustand [Static and stationary physical shapes], Braunschweig, Germany: Vieweg.
27.
KöhlerW. (1929) Gestalt psychology, New York, NY: Liveright.
28.
KolmogorovA. N. (1965) Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information. Problems in Information Transmission1: 1–7. doi:10.1080/00207166808803030.
29.
LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (1968) Structural information of visual patterns: An efficient coding system in perception, The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton & Co.
30.
LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (1969) Quantitative specification of information in sequential patterns. Psychological Review76: 216–220. doi:10.1037/h0027285.
31.
LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (1971) A perceptual coding language for visual and auditory patterns. American Journal of Psychology84: 307–349. doi:10.2307/1420464.
32.
LeeuwenbergE. L. J.BoselieF. (1988) Against the likelihood principle in visual form perception. Psychological Review95: 485–491. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.95.4.485.
33.
LeeuwenbergE. L. J.van der HelmP. A. (2013) Structural information theory: The simplicity of visual form, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
34.
LeeuwenbergE. L. J.van der HelmP. A.van LierR. J. (1994) From geons to structure: A note on object classification. Perception23: 505–515. doi:10.1068/p230505.
35.
LiM.VitányiP. (1997) An introduction to Kolmogorov complexity and its applications, 2nd ed.. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
36.
MacKay, D. J. C. (1992). Bayesian methods for adaptive models (PhD thesis). Pasadena, CA: California Institute of Technology. (Original working title Bayesian modeling and neural networks).
37.
MacKayD. J. C. (2003) Information theory, inference, and learning algorithms, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
38.
NyquistH. (1924) Certain factors affecting telegraph speed. Bell Systems Technology Journal3: 324–346. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1924.tb01361.x.
PizloZ. (2015) Philosophizing cannot substitute for experimentation: Comment on Hoffman, Singh & Prakash (2014). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review22: 1546–1547. doi:10.3758/s13423-014-0760-9.
41.
PomerantzJ.KubovyM. (1986) Theoretical approaches to perceptual organization: Simplicity and likelihood principles. In: BoffK. R.KaufmanL.ThomasJ. P. (eds) Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. 2. Cognitive processes and performance, New York, NY: Wiley, pp. 36-1–36-46.
42.
RissanenJ. (1978) Modelling by the shortest data description. Automatica14: 465–471. doi:10.1016/0005-1098(78)90005-5.
43.
Rissanen, J. (1989). Stochastic complexity in statistical inquiry theory. River Edge, NJ: World Scientific Publishing Co.
44.
RockI. (1983) The logic of perception, Cambridge: MIT Press.
45.
ShannonC. E. (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal27: 623–656. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb00917.x.
46.
ShannonC. E. (1956) The bandwagon. IRE Transactions on Information Theory2: 3, doi:10.1109/TIT.1956.1056774.
47.
ShannonC. E.WeaverW. (1949) The mathematical theory of communication, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
48.
SimonH. A. (1972) Complexity and the representation of patterned sequences of symbols. Psychological Review79: 369–382. doi:10.1037/h0033118.
49.
SolomonoffR. J. (1964a) A formal theory of inductive inference, Part 1. Information and Control7: 1–22. doi:10.1016/S0019-9958(64)90223-2.
50.
SolomonoffR. J. (1964b) A formal theory of inductive inference, Part 2. Information and Control7: 224–254. doi:10.1016/S0019-9958(64)90131-7.
51.
SutherlandS. (1988) Simplicity is not enough. In: ElsendoornB. A. G.BoumaH. (eds) Working models of human perception, London, England: Academic Press, pp. 381–390.
52.
ThorntonC. (2014) Infotropism as the underlying principle of perceptual organization. Journal of Mathematical Psychology61: 38–44. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2014.08.002.
53.
TribusM. (1961) Thermostatics and thermodynamics, Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
54.
van der HelmP. A. (2000) Simplicity versus likelihood in visual perception: From surprisals to precisals. Psychological Bulletin126: 770–800. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.126.5.770.
55.
van der HelmP. A. (2004) Transparallel processing by hyperstrings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA101: 10862–10867. doi:10.1073/pnas.0403402101.
56.
van der HelmP. A. (2011) Bayesian confusions surrounding simplicity and likelihood in perceptual organization. Acta Psychologica138: 337–346. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.09.007.
57.
van der HelmP. A. (2012) Cognitive architecture of perceptual organization: From neurons to gnosons. Cognitive Processing13: 13–40. doi:10.1007/s10339-011-0425-9.
58.
van der HelmP. A. (2014) Simplicity in vision: A multidisciplinary account of perceptual organization, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
59.
van der HelmP. A. (2015) Transparallel mind: Classical computing with quantum power. Artificial Intelligence Review44: 341–363. doi:10.1007/s10462-015-9429-7.
60.
van der HelmP. A. (2016) Structural coding versus free-energy predictive coding. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review23: 663–677. doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0938-9.
61.
van der HelmP. A.LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (1991) Accessibility, a criterion for regularity and hierarchy in visual pattern codes. Journal of Mathematical Psychology35: 151–213. doi:10.1016/0022-2496(91)90025-O.
62.
van der HelmP. A.LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (1996) Goodness of visual regularities: A nontransformational approach. Psychological Review103: 429–456. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.429.
63.
van der HelmP. A.LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (1999) A better approach to goodness: Reply to Wagemans (1999). Psychological Review106: 622–630. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.106.3.622.
64.
van der HelmP. A.LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (2004) Holographic goodness is not that bad: Reply to Olivers, Chater, and Watson (2004). Psychological Review111: 261–273. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.1.261.
65.
van LierR. J.van der HelmP. A.LeeuwenbergE. L. J. (1994) Integrating global and local aspects of visual occlusion. Perception23: 883–903. doi:10.1068/p230883.
66.
von Helmholtz, H. L. F. (1962). Treatise on physiological optics (J. P. C. Southall, Trans.). New York, NY: Dover. (Original work published 1909).
67.
Wallace, C., & Boulton, D. (1968). An information measure for classification. The Computer Journal, 11, 185–194. doi:10.1093/comjnl/11.2.185.
68.
WilderJ.FeldmanJ.SinghM. (2015a) Contour complexity and contour detection. Journal of Vision15: 1–16. doi:10.1167/15.6.6.
69.
WilderJ.FeldmanJ.SinghM. (2015b) The role of shape complexity in the detection of closed contours. Vision Research126: 220–231. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2015.10.011.
70.
WertheimerM. (1912) Experimentelle Studien über das Sehen von Bewegung [Experimental study on the perception of movement]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie12: 161–265.
71.
WertheimerM. (1923) Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt [On Gestalt theory]. Psychologische Forschung4: 301–350. doi:10.1007/BF00410640.
72.
WolpertD. H. (1995) On the Bayesian ”Occam factors” argument for Occam’s razor. In: PetscheT.HansonS. J.ShavlikJ. W. (eds) Computational learning theory and natural learning systems, Vol. III: Selecting good models (Ch. 11), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
