ABSTRACT
An important problem for HCI researchers is to estimate the parameter values of a cognitive model from behavioral data. This is a difficult problem, because of the substantial complexity and variety in human behavioral strategies. We report an investigation into a new approach using approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) to condition model parameters to data and prior knowledge. As the case study we examine menu interaction, where we have click time data only to infer a cognitive model that implements a search behaviour with parameters such as fixation duration and recall probability. Our results demonstrate that ABC (i) improves estimates of model parameter values, (ii) enables meaningful comparisons between model variants, and (iii) supports fitting models to individual users. ABC provides ample opportunities for theoretical HCI research by allowing principled inference of model parameter values and their uncertainty.
- John R. Anderson. 1991. Is human cognition adaptive? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14, 3 (1991), 471--485. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00070801 Google ScholarCross Ref
- John R. Anderson, Michael Matessa, and Christian Lebiere. 1997. ACT-R: A theory of higher level cognition and its relation to visual attention. Human--Computer Interaction 12, 4 (1997), 439--462. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci1204_5 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leif Azzopardi. 2014. Modelling interaction with economic models of search. In Proceedings of the 37th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval. ACM, 3--12. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2600428.2609574 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Myroslav Bachynskyi, Gregorio Palmas, Antti Oulasvirta, and Tino Weinkauf. 2015. Informing the design of novel input methods with muscle coactivation clustering. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 21, 6 (2015), 30:1--30:25. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2687921 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gilles Bailly, Antti Oulasvirta, Duncan P. Brumby, and Andrew Howes. 2014. Model of visual search and selection time in linear menus. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3865--3874. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557093 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Robert W. Baloh, Andrew W. Sills, Warren E. Kumley, and Vicente Honrubia. 1975. Quantitative measurement of saccade amplitude, duration, and velocity. Neurology 25, 11 (1975), 1065--1065. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.25.11.1065 Google ScholarCross Ref
- James L. Beck and Ka-Veng Yuen. 2004. Model selection using response measurements: Bayesian probabilistic approach. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 130, 2 (2004), 192--203. DOI:http: //dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733--9399(2004)130:2(192)Google ScholarCross Ref
- Duncan P. Brumby, Anna L. Cox, Jacqueline Chung, and Byron Fernandes. 2014. How does knowing what you are looking for change visual search behavior?. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3895--3898. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557064 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael D. Byrne. 2001. ACT-R/PM and menu selection: Applying a cognitive architecture to HCI. International Journal of Human--Computer Studies 55, 1 (2001), 41--84. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2001.0469 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Colin Camerer. 2003. Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Stuart K. Card, Allen Newell, and Thomas P. Moran. 1983. The psychology of human--computer interaction. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nick Chater and Mike Oaksford. 1999. Ten years of the rational analysis of cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3, 2 (1999), 57--65. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1364--6613(98)01273-XGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Xiuli Chen, Gilles Bailly, Duncan P. Brumby, Antti Oulasvirta, and Andrew Howes. 2015. The Emergence of Interactive Behavior: A Model of Rational Menu Search. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 4217--4226. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702483 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andy Cockburn, Per O. Kristensson, Jason Alexander, and Shumin Zhai. 2007. Hard lessons: Effort-inducing interfaces benefit spatial learning. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1571--1580. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240863 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Katalin Csilléry, Michael G.B. Blum, Oscar E. Gaggiotti, and Olivier François. 2010. Approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) in practice. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 25, 7 (2010), 410--418. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2010.04.001 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wai-Tat Fu and Peter Pirolli. 2007. SNIF-ACT: A cognitive model of user navigation on the World Wide Web. Human--Computer Interaction 22, 4 (2007), 355--412. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/ 07370020701638806Google ScholarDigital Library
- Samuel J. Gershman, Eric J. Horvitz, and Joshua B. Tenenbaum. 2015. Computational rationality: A converging paradigm for intelligence in brains, minds, and machines. Science 349, 6245 (2015), 273--278. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aac6076 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michael U. Gutmann and Jukka Corander. 2016. Bayesian optimization for likelihood-free inference of simulator-based statistical models. Journal of Machine Learning Research 17, 125 (2016), 1--47. http://jmlr.org/papers/v17/15-017.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Tim Halverson and Anthony J. Hornof. 2011. A computational model of "active vision" for visual search in human--computer interaction. Human--Computer Interaction 26, 4 (2011), 285--314. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2011.625237 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mary Hayhoe and Dana Ballard. 2014. Modeling task control of eye movements. Current Biology 24, 13 (2014), R622--R628. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.05.020 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Anthony J. Hornof. 2004. Cognitive strategies for the visual search of hierarchical computer displays. Human--Computer Interaction 19, 3 (2004), 183--223. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci1903_1 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andrew Howes, Richard L. Richard L Lewis, and Alonso Vera. 2009. Rational adaptation under task and processing constraints: Implications for testing theories of cognition and action. Psychological Review 116, 4 (2009), 717--751. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017187 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard J. Jagacinski and John M. Flach. 2003. Control theory for humans: Quantitative approaches to modeling performance. CRC Press.Google Scholar
- Antti Kangasrääsiö, Jarno Lintusaari, Kusti Skytén, Marko Järvenpää, Henri Vuollekoski, Michael Gutmann, Aki Vehtari, Jukka Corander, and Samuel Kaski. 2016. ELFI: Engine for likelihood-free inference (extended abstract). In NIPS 2016 Workshop on Advances in Approximate Bayesian Inference. https://github.com/hiit/elfiGoogle Scholar
- David E. Kieras and Anthony J. Hornof. 2014. Towards accurate and practical predictive models of active-vision-based visual search. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3875--3884. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557324 Google ScholarDigital Library
- David E. Kieras and David E. Meyer. 1997. An overview of the EPIC architecture for cognition and performance with application to human--computer interaction. Human--Computer Interaction 12, 4 (1997), 391--438. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci1204_4 Google ScholarDigital Library
- David E. Kieras, David E. Meyer, James A. Ballas, and Erick J. Lauber. 2000. Modern computational perspectives on executive mental processes and cognitive control: Where to from here? Control of Cognitive Processes: Attention and Performance XVIII (2000), 681--712.Google Scholar
- Richard L. Lewis, Andrew Howes, and Satinder Singh. 2014. Computational rationality: Linking mechanism and behavior through bounded utility maximization. Topics in Cognitive Science 6, 2 (2014), 279--311. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tops.12086 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Craig S. Miller and Roger W. Remington. 2004. Modeling information navigation: Implications for information architecture. Human--Computer Interaction 19, 3 (2004), 225--271. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci1903_2 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lewis R. L. Howes A. Myers, C. W. 2013. Bounded optimal state estimation and control in visual search: explaining distractor ratio effects. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
- Jay I. Myung and Mark A. Pitt. 2016. Model comparison in psychology. In The Stevens' Handbook of Experimental Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience (Fourth Edition), Volume 5: Methodology. John Wiley & Sons. To appear.Google Scholar
- Andrew Y. Ng and Stuart J. Russell. 2000. Algorithms for inverse reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Machine Learning. 663--670.Google Scholar
- Erik Nilsen and Jake Evans. 1999. Exploring the divide between two unified theories of cognition: Modeling visual attention in menu selection. In CHI'99 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 288--289. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/632716.632893 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jose Nunez-Varela and Jeremy L. Wyatt. 2013. Models of gaze control for manipulation tasks. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 10, 4 (2013), 20:1--20:22. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2536764.2536767 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mike Oaksford and Nick Chater. 1994. A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review 101, 4 (1994), 608--631. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033--295X.101.4.608Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stephen J. Payne and Andrew Howes. 2013. Adaptive interaction: A utility maximization approach to understanding human interaction with technology. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 6, 1 (2013), 1--111. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2200/S00479ED1V01Y201302HCI016 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Peter Pirolli. 2005. Rational analyses of information foraging on the web. Cognitive Science 29, 3 (2005), 343--373. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_20 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Peter Pirolli and Stuart Card. 1999. Information foraging. Psychological Review 106, 4 (1999), 643--675. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033--295X.106.4.643Google ScholarCross Ref
- Deepak Ramachandran and Eyal Amir. 2007. Bayesian inverse reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the Twentieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 2586--2591.Google Scholar
- Keith Rayner. 1998. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin 124, 3 (1998), 372--422. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033--2909.124.3.372Google ScholarCross Ref
- David E. Rumelhart and Donald A. Norman. 1982. Simulating a skilled typist: A study of skilled cognitive-motor performance. Cognitive Science 6, 1 (1982), 1--36. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mikael Sunnåker, Alberto G. Busetto, Elina Numminen, Jukka Corander, Matthieu Foll, and Christophe Dessimoz. 2013. Approximate Bayesian computation. PLoS Computational Biology 9, 1 (2013), e1002803. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002803 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto. 1998. Reinforcement learning: An introduction. MIT press.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yuan-Chi Tseng and Andrew Howes. 2015. The adaptation of visual search to utility, ecology and design. International Journal of Human--Computer Studies 80 (2015), 45--55. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.03.005 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brian D. Ziebart, Andrew Maas, J. Andrew Bagnell, and Anind K. Dey. 2008. Maximum entropy inverse reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1433--1438.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Inferring Cognitive Models from Data using Approximate Bayesian Computation
Recommendations
Multilevel rejection sampling for approximate Bayesian computation
AbstractLikelihood-free methods, such as approximate Bayesian computation, are powerful tools for practical inference problems with intractable likelihood functions. Markov chain Monte Carlo and sequential Monte Carlo variants of approximate ...
Non-linear regression models for Approximate Bayesian Computation
Approximate Bayesian inference on the basis of summary statistics is well-suited to complex problems for which the likelihood is either mathematically or computationally intractable. However the methods that use rejection suffer from the curse of ...
A transdimensional approximate Bayesian computation using the pseudo-marginal approach for model choice
When the likelihood functions are either unavailable analytically or are computationally cumbersome to evaluate, it is impossible to implement conventional Bayesian model choice methods. Instead, approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) or the likelihood-...
Comments