.png){kind=icon}
返回
Optimally Interacting Minds
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1126/science.1185718.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
In everyday life, many people believe that two heads are better than one. Our ability to solve problems together appears to be fundamental to the current dominance and future survival of the human species. But are two heads really better than one? We addressed this question in the context of a collective low-level perceptual decision-making task. For two observers of nearly equal visual sensitivity, two heads were definitely better than one, provided they were given the opportunity to communicate freely, even in the absence of any feedback about decision outcomes. But for observers with very different visual sensitivities, two heads were actually worse than the better one. These seemingly discrepant patterns of group behavior can be explained by a model in which two heads are Bayes optimal under the assumption that individuals accurately communicate their level of confidence on every trial.
Keyword:
POPULATION CODES
DECISION-MAKING
INTEGRATION
PERFORMANCE
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
45.8
论文数:
2.3W
被引数:
80.3W
机构
引用论文
GROUP VERSUS INDIVIDUAL-PERFORMANCE - ARE N + 1 HEADS BETTER THAN ONE.png)
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETINIF19.8
PREAI
分享收藏分享收藏Highly Incomplete Taxa Can Rescue Phylogenetic Analyses from the Negative Impacts of Limited Taxon SamplingPLoS ONE
OAAI
PLoS ONEIF0
OAAI分享收藏The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration接近最佳双峰积分的口技效果CURRENT BIOLOGYOAAI
CURRENT BIOLOGYIF7.5
OAAI分享收藏
查看更多内容