PATTERN RECOGNITION

In psychology and cognitive neuroscience, pattern recognition describes a cognitive process

that matches information from a stimulus with information retrieved from memory.[1]

Pattern recognition occurs when information from the environment is received and entered
into short-term memory, causing automatic activation of a specific content of long-term memory.
An early example of this is learning the alphabet in order. When a carer repeats ‘A, B, C’ multiple
times to a child, utilizing the pattern recognition, the child says ‘C’ after he/she hears ‘A, B’ in order.
Recognizing patterns allow us to predict and expect what is coming. The process of pattern
recognition involves matching the information received with the information already stored in the
brain. Making the connection between memories and information perceived is a step of pattern
recognition called identification. Pattern recognition requires repetition of experience. Semantic
memory, which is used implicitly and subconsciously is the main type of memory involved with
recognition.[2]

Pattern recognition is not only crucial to humans, but to other animals as well. Even koalas,
who possess less-developed thinking abilities, use pattern recognition to find and consume
eucalyptus leaves. The human brain has developed more, but holds similarities to the brains of birds
and lower mammals. The development of neural networks in the outer layer of the brain in humans
has allowed for better processing of visual and auditory patterns. Spatial positioning in the
environment, remembering findings, and detecting hazards and resources to increase chances of
survival are examples of the application of pattern recognition for humans and animals.[3]

There are six main theories of pattern recognition: template matching, prototype-matching,
feature analysis, multiple discrimination scaling, recognition-by-components theory, and bottom-
up and top-down processing. The application of these theories in everyday life is not mutually
exclusive. Pattern recognition allows us to read words, understand language, recognize friends, and
even appreciate music. Each of the theories applies to various activities and domains where pattern
recognition is observed. Facial, music and language recognition, and seriation are a few of such
domains. Facial recognition and seriation occur through encoding visual patterns, while music and
language recognition use the encoding of auditory patterns.

1 THEORIES

1.1 TEMPLATE MATCHING

Template matching theory describes the most basic approach to human pattern recognition.
It is a theory that assumes every perceived object is stored as a "template" into long-term
memory.[4] Incoming information is compared to these templates to find an exact match.[5] In other
words, all sensory input is compared to multiple representations of an object to form one single
conceptual understanding. The theory defines perception as a fundamentally recognition-based
process. It assumes that everything we see, we understand only through past exposure, which then
informs our future perception of the external world.[6] For example, A, a, and A are all recognized as
the letter A, but not B. This viewpoint is limited, however, in explaining how new experiences can be
understood without being compared to an internal memory template.[7]

1.2 PROTOTYPE MATCHING

Unlike the exact, one-to-one, template matching theory, prototype matching instead
compares incoming sensory input to one average prototype.[7] This theory proposes that exposure
to a series of related stimuli leads to the creation of a "typical" prototype based on their shared
features.[6] It reduces the number of stored templates by standardizing them into a single
representation.[4] The prototype supports perceptual flexibility, because unlike in template
matching, it allows for variability in the recognition of novel stimuli.[7] For instance, if a child had
never seen a lawn chair before, they would still be able to recognize it as a chair because of their
understanding of its essential characteristics as having four legs and a seat. This idea, however, limits
the conceptualization of objects that cannot necessarily be "averaged" into one, like types of
canines, for instance. Even though dogs, wolves, and foxes are all typically furry, four-legged,
moderately sized animals with ears and a tail, they are not all the same, and thus cannot be strictly
perceived with respect to the prototype matching theory.

1.3 FEATURE ANALYSIS

Multiple theories try to explain how humans are able to recognize patterns in their
environment. Feature detection theory proposes that the nervous system sorts and filters incoming
stimuli to allow the human (or animal) to make sense of the information. In the organism, this
system is made up of feature detectors, which are individual neurons, or groups of neurons, that
encode specific perceptual features. The theory proposes an increasing complexity in the
relationship between detectors and the perceptual feature. The most basic feature detectors
respond to simple properties of the stimuli. Further along the perceptual pathway, higher organized
feature detectors are able to respond to more complex and specific stimuli properties. When
features repeat or occur in a meaningful sequence, we are able to identify these patterns because of
our feature detection system.

1.4 MULTIPLE DISCRIMINATION SCALING

Template and feature analysis approaches to recognition of objects (and situations) have been
merged / reconciled / overtaken by multiple discrimination theory. This states that the amounts in a
test stimulus of each salient feature of a template are recognized in any perceptual judgment as
being at a distance in the universal unit of 50% discrimination (the objective performance 'JND'[8])
from the amount of that feature in the template.[9]
1.5 RECOGNITION BY COMPONENTS THEORY
Similar to feature detection theory, recognition by components (RBC) focuses on the bottom-
up features of the stimuli being processed. First proposed by Irving Biederman (1987), this theory
states that humans recognize objects by breaking them down into their basic 3D geometric shapes
called geons (i.e. cylinders, cubes, cones, etc.). An example is how we break down a common item
like a coffee cup: we recognize the hollow cylinder that holds the liquid and a curved handle off the
side that allows us to hold it. Even though not every coffee cup is exactly the same, these basic
components helps us to recognize the consistency across examples (or pattern). RBC suggests that
are fewer than 36 unique geons that when combined can form a virtually unlimited number of
objects. To parse and dissect an object, RBC proposes we attend to two specific features: edges and
concavities. Edges enable the observer to maintain a consistent representation of the object
regardless of the viewing angle and lighting conditions. Concavities are where two edges meet and
enable the observer to perceive where one geon ends
and another begins.

The RBC principles of visual object recognition can

be applied to auditory language recognition as well. In
place of geons, language researchers propose that
spoken language can be broken down into basic
components called phonemes. There are 44 phonemes in
the English language, and it takes 55 phonemes to
Image showing the breakdown of common geometric
encompass the entirety of all spoken human language. shapes (geons).

1.6 TOP-DOWN AND BOTTOM-UP PROCESSING

1.6.1 Top-down processing

Top-down processing refers to the use of background information in pattern

recognition.[10] It always begins with a person’s previous knowledge, and makes predictions due to
this already acquired knowledge.[11] Psychologist Richard Gregory estimated that about 90% of the
information is lost between the time it takes to go from the eye to the brain, which is why the brain
must guess what the person sees based on past experiences. In other words, we construct our
perception of reality, and these perceptions are hypotheses or propositions based on past
experiences and stored information. The formation of incorrect propositions will lead to errors of
perception such as visual illusions.[10] Given a paragraph written with difficult handwriting, it is
easier to understand what the writer wants to convey if one reads the whole paragraph rather than
reading the words in separate terms. The brain may be able to perceive and understand the gist of
the paragraph due to the context supplied by the surrounding words.[12]

1.6.2 Bottom-up processing

Bottom-up processing is also known as data-driven processing, because it originates with

the stimulation of the sensory receptors.[11] Psychologist James Gibson opposed the top-down
model and argued that perception is direct, and not subject to hypothesis testing as Gregory
proposed. He stated that sensation is perception and there is no need for extra interpretation, as
there is enough information in our environment to make sense of the world in a direct way. His
theory is sometimes known as the "ecological theory" because of the claim that perception can be
explained solely in terms of the environment. An example of bottom up-processing involves
presenting a flower at the center of a person's field. The sight of the flower and all the information
about the stimulus are carried from the retina to the visual cortex in the brain. The signal travels in
one direction.[12]

2 SERIATION
In psychologist Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development,
the third stage is called the Concrete Operational State. It is during this
stage that the abstract principle of thinking called "seriation" is naturally
developed in a child.[13] Seriation is the ability to arrange items in a
logical order along a quantitative dimension such as length, weight, age,
etc.[14] It is a general cognitive skill which is not fully mastered until
after the nursery years .[15] To seriate means to understand that
objects can be ordered along a dimension,[13] and to effectively do so,
the child needs to be able to answer the question "What comes
next?"[15] Seriation skills also help to develop problem-solving skills, which A simple seriation task involving
arranging shapes by size
are useful in recognizing and completing patterning tasks

3 FACIAL PATTERN RECOGNITION

Recognizing faces is one of the most common forms of pattern recognition. Humans are
incredibly effective at remembering faces, but this ease and automaticity belies a very challenging
problem.[16][17] All faces are physically similar. Faces have two eyes, one mouth, and one nose all in
predictable locations, yet humans can recognize a face from several different angles and in various
lighting conditions.[17]

Neuroscientists posit that recognizing faces takes place in three phases. The first phase starts
with visually focusing on of the physical features). The facial recognition system then needs to
reconstruct the identity of the person from previous experiences. This provides us with the signal
that this might be a person we know. The final phase of recognition completes when the face elicits
the name of the person.[18]

Although humans are great at recognizing faces under normal viewing angles, upside-down
faces are tremendously difficult to recognize. This demonstrates not only the challenges of facial
recognition but also how humans have specialized procedures and capacities for recognizing faces
under normal upright viewing conditions.[17]

3.1 NEURAL MECHANISMS

Scientists agree that there is a certain area in the brain specifically devoted to processing
faces. This structure is called the fusiform gyrus, and brain imaging studies have shown that it
becomes highly active when a subject is viewing a face.[19]

Several case studies have reported that patients with lesions or tissue damage localized to this
area have tremendous difficulty recognizing faces, even their own. Although most of this research is
circumstantial, a study at Stanford University provided conclusive evidence for the fusiform gyrus'
role in facial recognition. In a unique case study, researchers were able to send direct signals to a
patient's fusiform gyrus. The patient reported that the faces of the doctors and nurses changed and
morphed in front of him during this electrical stimulation. Researchers agree this demonstrates a
convincing causal link between this neural structure and the human ability to recognize faces.[19]

3.2 FACIAL RECOGNITION DEVELOPMENT

Although in adults, facial recognition is fast and automatic, children do not reach adult levels
of performance (in laboratory tasks) until adolescence.[20] Two general theories have been put forth
to explain how facial recognition normally develops. The first, general cognitive development theory,
proposes that the perceptual ability to encode faces is fully developed early in childhood, and that
the continued improvement of facial recognition into adulthood is attributed to other general
factors. These general factors include improved attentional focus, deliberate task strategies, and
metacognition. Research supports the argument that these other general factors improve
dramatically into adulthood.[20] Face-specific perceptual development theory argues that the
improved facial recognition between children and adults is due to a precise development of facial
perception. The cause for this continuing development is proposed to be an ongoing experience with
faces.

3.3 DEVELOPMENTAL ISSUES

Several developmental issues manifest as a decreased capacity for facial recognition. Using
what is known about the role of the fusiform gyrus, research has shown that impaired social
development along the autism spectrum is accompanied by a behavioral marker where these
individuals tend to look away from faces, and a neurological marker characterized by decreased
neural activity in the fusiform gyrus. Similarly, those with developmental prosopagnosia (DP)
struggle with facial recognition to the extent they are often unable to identify even their own faces.
Many studies report that around 2% of the world’s population have developmental prosopagnosia,
and that individuals with DP have a family history of the trait.[17] Individuals with DP are
behaviorally indistinguishable from those with physical damage or lesions on the fusiform gyrus,
again implicating its importance to facial recognition. Despite those with DP or neurological damage,
there remains a large variability in facial recognition ability in the total population.[17] It is unknown
what accounts for the differences in facial recognition ability, whether it is a biological or
environmental disposition. Recent research analyzing identical and fraternal twins showed that facial
recognition was significantly higher correlated in identical twins, suggesting a strong genetic
component to individual differences in facial recognition ability.[17]

4 LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT

4.1 PATTERN RECOGNITION IN LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Recent research reveals that infant language acquisition is linked to cognitive pattern
recognition.[21] Unlike classical nativist and behavioral theories of language development,[22]
scientists now believe that language is a learned skill.[21] Studies at the Hebrew University and the
University of Sydney both show a strong correlation between the ability to identify visual patterns
and to learn a new language.[21][23] Children with high shape recognition showed better grammar
knowledge, even when controlling for the effects of intelligence and memory capacity.[23] This is
supported by the theory that language learning is based on statistical learning,[21] the process by
which infants perceive common combinations of sounds and words in language and use them to
inform future speech production

4.2 PHONOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT

The first step in infant language acquisition is to decipher between the most basic sound units
of their native language. This includes every consonant, every short and long vowel sound, and any
additional letter combinations like "th" and "ph" in English. These units, called phonemes, are
detected through exposure and pattern recognition. Infants use their "innate feature detector"
capabilities to distinguish between the sounds of words.[22] They split them into phonemes through
a mechanism of categorical perception. Then they extract statistical information by recognizing
which combinations of sounds are most likely to occur together,[22] like "qu" or "h" plus a vowel. In
this way, their ability to learn words is based directly on the accuracy of their earlier phonetic
patterning.

4.3 GRAMMAR DEVELOPMENT

The transition from phonemic differentiation into higher-order word production[22] is only
the first step in the hierarchical acquisition of language. Pattern recognition is furthermore utilized in
the detection of prosody cues, the stress and intonation patterns among words.[22] Then it is
applied to sentence structure and the understanding of typical clause boundaries.[22] This entire
process is reflected in reading as well. First, a child recognizes patterns of individual letters, then
words, then groups of words together, then paragraphs, and finally entire chapters in books.[24]
Learning to read and learning to speak a language are based on the "stepwise refinement of
patterns"[24] in perceptual pattern recognition.

5 REFERENCES

1. Eysenck, Michael W.; Keane, Mark T. (2003). Cognitive Psychology: A Student's Handbook
(4th ed.). Hove; Philadelphia; New York: Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9780863775512. OCLC
894210185. Retrieved 27 November 2014.
2. Snyder, B. (2000). Music and memory: An introduction. MIT press.
3. Mattson, M. P. (2014). Superior pattern processing is the essence of the evolved human
brain. Frontiers in neuroscience, 8.
4. Shugen, W. (2002). Framework of pattern recognition model based on the cognitive
psychology. Geo-spatial Information Science, 5(2), 74-78.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02833890
5. H. Gregg. (2013, May 1). Perception and perceptual illusions. Psychology Today. Retrieved
from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/theory-knowledge/201305/perception-and-
perceptual-illusions
6. Top-down and bottom-up theories of perception. (2009, June 27). Retrieved from
http://cognitivepsychology.wikidot.com/cognition:topdown
7. Y. Pi, W. Liao, M. Liu, & J. Lu. (2008). Theory of cognitive pattern recognition. INTECH.
Retrieved from http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/5795.pdf
8. Torgerson, 1958
9. Booth & Freeman, 1993, Acta Psychologica
10. McLeod, S. (2008) Visual Perception Theory. Simply Psychology. Retrieved from
https://www.simplypsychology.org/perception-theories.html
11. Wede, J. (2014, April 28). Bottom-up and Top-down Processing: A Collaborative Duality.
Retrieved from: http://sites.psu.edu/psych256sp14/2014/04/28/bottom-up-and-top-down-
processing-a-collaborative-duality/
12. Sincero, S. M. (2013) Top-Down VS Bottom-Up Processing. Retrieved Oct 20, 2017 from
Explorable.com: https://explorable.com/top-down-vs-bottom-up-processing
13. Kidd, J. K., Curby, T. W., Boyer, C., Gadzichowski, K., Gallington, D. A., Machado, J. A., &
Pasnak, R. (2012). Benefits of an intervention focused on oddity and seriation. Early
Education and Development, 23(6), 900-918
https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2011.621877
14. Berk, L. E. (2013). Development through the lifespan (6th ed.). Pearson. ISBN
9780205957606
15. Curtis, A. (2002). Curriculum for the pre-school child. Routledge. ISBN 9781134770458
16. Sheikh, K. (2017) How We Save Face--Researchers Crack the Brain's Facial-Recognition Code.
Scientific American. Retrieved from: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-we-
save-face-researchers-crack-the-brains-facial-recognition-code/
17. Duchaine, B. (2015). Individual differences in face recognition ability: Impacts on law
enforcement, criminal justice and national security. APA: Psychological Science Agenda.
Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2015/06/face-recognition.aspx
18. Wlassoff, V. (2015). How the Brain Recognizes Faces. Brain Blogger. Retrieved from:
http://brainblogger.com/2015/10/17/how-the-brain-recognizes-faces/
19. Norton, E. (2012). Identifying the Brain's own Facial Recognition System. Science Magazine.
Retrieved from: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/10/identifying-brains-own-facial-
recognition-system
20. McKone, E., et al. (2012). A critical review of the development of face recognition:
Experience is less important than previously believed. Cognitive Neuropsychology. doi
10.1080/02643294.2012.660138
21. Language ability linked to pattern recognition. (2013, May 29). VOA. Retrieved October 25,
2017 from https://www.voanews.com/a/language-ability-linked-to-pattern-
recognition/1670776.html
22. Kuhl, P. K. (2000). A new view of language acquisition. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, 97(22), 11850–11857. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.97.22.11850
23. University of Sydney. (2016, May 5). Pattern learning key to children's language
development. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 25, 2017 from
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/160505222938.htm
24. Basulto, D. (2013, July 24). Humans are the world’s best pattern-recognition machines, but
for how long? Retrieved October 25, 2017 from http://bigthink.com/endless-
innovation/humans-are-the-worlds-best-pattern-recognition-machines-but-for-how-long