View-based matching can be more than image matching: The importance of considering an animal's perspective.

Paul Graham,Antoine Wystrach

doi:10.1068/i0542ic

Abstract

Using vision for navigation is important for many animals and a common debate is the extent to which spatial performance can be explained by “simple” view-based matching strategies. We discuss, in the context of recent work, how confusion between image-matching algorithms and the broader class of view-based navigation strategies, is hindering the debate around the use of vision in spatial cognition. A proper consideration of view-based matching strategies requires an understanding of the visual information available to a given animal within a particular experiment.

Highlights

An emerging debate that pits direct and indirect ideas against each other concerns whether animals possess and use a geometric module to represent the shape of environments (Cheng, 2008)
It has been shown that the shape of such arenas is implicitly contained in panoramic views (Stürzl, Cheung, Cheng, & Zeil, 2008) and that simple view-based matching strategies could explain many experimental results (Cheung, Stürzl, Zeil, & Cheng, 2008)
View-based matching is a useful strategy for any navigator (Wystrach & Graham, 2012)

Summary

Introduction

An emerging debate that pits direct and indirect ideas against each other concerns whether animals possess and use a geometric module to represent the shape of environments (Cheng, 2008). Rats often made errors by confusing the rewarded corner and its geometrical equivalent (i.e., the diagonally opposite corner, which shares the same position relative to the rectangular shape of the arena), even when each corner is marked by a distinct visual feature. It has been shown that the shape of such arenas is implicitly contained in panoramic views (Stürzl, Cheung, Cheng, & Zeil, 2008) and that simple view-based matching strategies could explain many experimental results (Cheung, Stürzl, Zeil, & Cheng, 2008).

Results

Conclusion