Prevalence learning and decision making in a visual search task: an equivalent ideal observer approach
暂无分享,去创建一个
Frank W. Samuelson | Rongping Zeng | Berkman Sahiner | Xin He | B. Sahiner | F. Samuelson | R. Zeng | Xin He
[1] Martin Peterson,et al. An Introduction to Decision Theory , 2009 .
[2] C. Beam,et al. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Findings from a national sample. , 1996, Archives of internal medicine.
[3] R. F. Wagner,et al. Reader Variability in Mammography and Its Implications for Expected Utility over the Population of Readers and Cases , 2004, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.
[4] D. M. Green,et al. Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .
[5] J SWETS,et al. Decision processes in perception. , 1961, Psychological review.
[6] Brandon D Gallas,et al. One-shot estimate of MRMC variance: AUC. , 2006, Academic radiology.
[7] Frank W. Samuelson,et al. The equivalence of a human observer and an ideal observer in binary diagnostic tasks , 2013, Medical Imaging.
[8] N Houssami,et al. Reader variability in reporting breast imaging according to BI-RADS assessment categories (the Florence experience). , 2006, Breast.
[9] Jeremy M. Wolfe,et al. Even in correctable search, some types of rare targets are frequently missed , 2009, Attention, perception & psychophysics.
[10] M P Eckstein,et al. Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. I. Effect of number of possible spatial locations and signal contrast. , 1996, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.
[11] C. Beam,et al. Effect of human variability on independent double reading in screening mammography. , 1996, Academic radiology.
[12] Jeremy M Wolfe,et al. Prevalence of abnormalities influences cytologists' error rates in screening for cervical cancer. , 2011, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.
[13] Karla K. Evans,et al. If You Don’t Find It Often, You Often Don’t Find It: Why Some Cancers Are Missed in Breast Cancer Screening , 2013, PloS one.
[14] Rongping Zeng,et al. Discovering intrinsic properties of human observers' visual search and mathematical observers' scanning. , 2014, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.
[15] J. Wolfe,et al. Varying Target Prevalence Reveals Two Dissociable Decision Criteria in Visual Search , 2010, Current Biology.
[16] Jeremy M Wolfe,et al. Prevalence effects in newly trained airport checkpoint screeners: trained observers miss rare targets, too. , 2013, Journal of vision.
[17] J. Swets,et al. A decision-making theory of visual detection. , 1954, Psychological review.
[18] David Gur,et al. Prevalence effect in a laboratory environment. , 2003, Radiology.
[19] Naomi M. Kenner,et al. Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.
[20] Z. J. Ulehla,et al. Optimality of perceptual decision criteria. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.
[21] J. P. Thomas,et al. A signal detection model predicts the effects of set size on visual search accuracy for feature, conjunction, triple conjunction, and disjunction displays , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.
[22] Shinichi Kita,et al. The effects of local prevalence and explicit expectations on search termination times , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.
[23] Bruno de Finetti,et al. Probabilism , 1989 .