A comparison of fixed-step-size and Bayesian staircases for sensory threshold estimation

Fixed-step-size (FSS) and Bayesian staircases are widely used methods to estimate sensory thresholds in 2AFC tasks, although a direct comparison of both types of procedure under identical conditions has not previously been reported. A simulation study and an empirical test were conducted to compare the performance of optimized Bayesian staircases with that of four optimized variants of FSS staircase differing as to up-down rule. The ultimate goal was to determine whether FSS or Bayesian staircases are the best choice in experimental psychophysics. The comparison considered the properties of the estimates (i.e. bias and standard errors) in relation to their cost (i.e. the number of trials to completion). The simulation study showed that mean estimates of Bayesian and FSS staircases are dependable when sufficient trials are given and that, in both cases, the standard deviation (SD) of the estimates decreases with number of trials, although the SD of Bayesian estimates is always lower than that of FSS estimates (and thus, Bayesian staircases are more efficient). The empirical test did not support these conclusions, as (1) neither procedure rendered estimates converging on some value, (2) standard deviations did not follow the expected pattern of decrease with number of trials, and (3) both procedures appeared to be equally efficient. Potential factors explaining the discrepancies between simulation and empirical results are commented upon and, all things considered, a sensible recommendation is for psychophysicists to run no fewer than 18 and no more than 30 reversals of an FSS staircase implementing the 1-up/3-down rule.

On the size of the fibers of spectral maps induced by semialgebraic embeddings

Let S(M) be the ring of (continuous) semialgebraic functions on a semialgebraic set M and S*(M) its subring of bounded semialgebraic functions. In this work we compute the size of the fibers of the spectral maps Spec(j)1:Spec(S(N))→Spec(S(M)) and Spec(j)2:Spec(S*(N))→Spec(S*(M)) induced by the inclusion j:N M of a semialgebraic subset N of M. The ring S(M) can be understood as the localization of S*(M) at the multiplicative subset WM of those bounded semialgebraic functions on M with empty zero set. This provides a natural inclusion iM:Spec(S(M)) Spec(S*(M)) that reduces both problems above to an analysis of the fibers of the spectral map Spec(j)2:Spec(S*(N))→Spec(S*(M)). If we denote Z:=ClSpec(S*(M))(M N), it holds that the restriction map Spec(j)2|:Spec(S*(N)) Spec(j)2-1(Z)→Spec(S*(M)) Z is a homeomorphism. Our problem concentrates on the computation of the size of the fibers of Spec(j)2 at the points of Z. The size of the fibers of prime ideals "close" to the complement Y:=M N provides valuable information concerning how N is immersed inside M. If N is dense in M, the map Spec(j)2 is surjective and the generic fiber of a prime ideal p∈Z contains infinitely many elements. However, finite fibers may also appear and we provide a criterium to decide when the fiber Spec(j)2-1(p) is a finite set for p∈Z. If such is the case, our procedure allows us to compute the size s of Spec(j)2-1(p). If in addition N is locally compact and M is pure dimensional, s coincides with the number of minimal prime ideals contained in p. © 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.