Machine Perception MU—Visual Intelligence Tests

  • Zbigniew LesEmail author
  • Magdalena Les
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 842)


As it was shown in the previous Chapter visual intelligence tests belong to the category of the visual problems. Visual intelligence tests are series of tasks designed to measure the capacity to make abstractions, to learn, and to deal with novel situations.


  1. 1.
    Colaruso R, Hammil D (2003) Motor free visual perception test. Academic Therapy Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gardener MF (1996) Test of visual-perceptual skills. Psychological and Educational PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roid G (2003) Stanford-binet intelligence scale. RiversideGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gluting J, Adams W, Shwslow D (1999) Wide range intelligence test. Wide RangeGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sala D, Gray C, Baddeley A, Wilson L (1997) Visual patterns test. Thames Valley Test CompanyGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Meyers JE, Meyers KR (1996) Rey complex figure test and recognition trial. PARGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huber H (1948) Rorschach psychodiagnostic test. Hans HuberGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Les Z, Les M (2015) Shape understanding system—machine understanding and human understanding. Studies in computational intelligence. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Les Z, Les M (2013) Shape understanding system—knowledge implementation and learning. Studies in computational intelligence. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Les Z, Les M (2018) Machine understanding—testing visual understanding ability of machine: the visual intelligence test. Int J Underst 7Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gentner D, Holyoak KJ, Kokinov BN (2001) The analogical mind: perspectives from cognitive science. MIT press, MassachusettsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shelley C (2003) Multiple analogies in science and philosophy. John Benjamins PublishingGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Holyoak KJ, Thagard P (1997) The analogical mind. Am Psychol 52(1):35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Falkenhainer B, Forbus KD, Gentner D (1990) The Structure mapping engine: algorithm and examples. Artif Intell 41:163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Griffith TW, Nersessian NJ, Goel AK (200) Function-follows-form transformations in scientific problem solving. In: Twenty-second annual conference of the cognitive science society, New Jersey. Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Forbus KD, Usher JM, Tomai E (2005) Analogical learning of visual/conceptual relationships in sketches. In: AAAIGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Forbus KD, Usher JM Lovett A, Lockwood K, Wetzel J (2011) Cogsketch: sketch understanding for cognitive science research and for education. Top Cogn SciGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chang MD, Wetzel JW, Forbus KD (2014) Spatial reasoning in comparative analyses of physics diagrams. In: International Conference, spatial cognition, Bremen, Germany. Springer, Berlin, pp 268–282Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sadeghi F, Zitnick CL, Farhadi A (2015) Visalogy: answering visual analogy questions. In: NIPS’ 15 international conference on neural information processing system, Montreal. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Indurkhya B (1992) Metaphor and cognition. Kluwer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hofstadter R, Mitchell JC (1995) The copycat project: a model of mental fluidity and analogy-making. In: Hofstadter DR, F.A.R. group (eds) Fluid concepts and creative analogies pp 205–267Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dastani M, Indurkhya B (2001) Modeling context effect in perceptual domains. Paper presented at the 3rd international and interdisciplinary conference on modeling and using contextGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schwering A, Krumnack U, Kühnberger K, Gus H (2007) Using gestalt principles to compute analogies of geometric figures. In: The annual meeting of the cognitive science societyGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Les Z, Les M (2018) Machine understanding—testing visual understanding ability of machine: the visual analogy test. Int J Underst 7:1–50Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Les M, Murphy M (2002) Computer based assessments—does prior computer competence counts? In: The AARE international education research conference, Brisbane. AAREGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The St. Queen Jadwiga Research Institute of UnderstandingToorak, MelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations