论文部分内容阅读
有关多目标追踪的研究多采用目标闪烁数次或目标周围出现方框等视觉方式对目标进行标记。在已有研究基础上,通过2个实验比较了不同目标数量下视觉平行标记、视觉序列标记、听觉序列标记(视听跨通道标记)和视听双通道序列标记4种目标标记方式对多目标追踪表现的影响。实验一发现目标数量为3时,4种目标标记方式下的追踪正确率无显著差异;目标数量为4时,视觉序列标记条件下的追踪正确率最高;目标数量为5时,视听双通道序列标记下的追踪正确率最高。实验二发现视觉平行标记和视觉序列标记下的追踪正确率显著高于视听跨通道序列标记条件。研究结果表明在多目标追踪任务中,线索阶段目标的视觉标记比视听跨通道标记更有效,且不受目标的序列或平行标记的影响,而视觉编码和听觉编码的结合即目标的视听双通道标记可以促进任务难度较高时的追踪表现。
Research on multi-target tracking often uses visual methods such as blinking a target or boxing around the target to mark the target. On the basis of previous studies, we compared the performance of four target labeling methods of visual parallel marker, visual sequence marker, auditory sequence marker (audio-visual cross-channel marker) and audio-visual dual-channel sequence marker on multi-target tracking performance Impact. In the first experiment, when the number of target was 3, there was no significant difference in tracking accuracy between the four target labeling methods. When the target number was 4, the tracking accuracy was the highest under the visual sequence marking condition. When the target number was 5, Tracking under the highest markup accuracy. In Experiment 2, the accuracy of tracking under visual parallel marker and visual sequence marker was significantly higher than that of cross-channel sequence marker. The results show that in the multi-objective tracking task, the visual marking of the target stage of the cue is more effective than the audio-visual cross-lane marking, and is not affected by the target sequence or the parallel marking. The combination of visual coding and auditory coding, that is, Markers can help track performance when tasks are difficult.