Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Custom psychometric functions #24

Open
Duls91 opened this issue Jan 31, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

Custom psychometric functions #24

Duls91 opened this issue Jan 31, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@Duls91
Copy link

Duls91 commented Jan 31, 2020

customPFDemos.zip
Hello,

I wanted to implement two custom psychometric functions and test their performance with the simple routine from qpQuestPlusCoreFunctionDemo.m.
Attached are the custom PFs "Gumbel_pal" and "Weibull_pal". In the respective qpQuestPlusCoreFunctionDemo_Gumbel and qpQuestPlusCoreFunctionDemo_Weibull scripts, I specified the PFs and adjusted the stimulus domains.

The idea behind it:
The original Weibull function in mQuestPlus is a log-Weibull (or Gumbel) adjusted for the dB scale (therefore dividing by 20).
I wanted to write a more general log-scale Weibull ("Gumbel_pal").
Also, on a linear scale, a conventional Weibull ("Weibull_pal") would be useful.

Testing these two PFs leads to bad performance though. The stimuli presented by Quest seem to be way off and the parameter estimates for threshold or slope are disastrous.
I am not sure whether I adapted the scripts at all places to work with the custom PFs. Plotting the functions seems to result in a valid output i.e.

stimFine = linspace(-60,-20,100)';
y = qpPFGumbel_pal(stimFine, [-28, 0.15, 0.01, 0.01]);
plot(stimFine, y(:,2), 'linewidth', 2);

Hope someone can resolve this issue with me. Thank you!

@Duls91 Duls91 changed the title Custom Custom psychometric functions Jan 31, 2020
@DavidBrainard
Copy link
Contributor

DavidBrainard commented Feb 1, 2020 via email

@Duls91
Copy link
Author

Duls91 commented Feb 5, 2020

Dear David,

thank you for your reply. I did miss the already contributed Weibull function. Still, even testing my Demo with this PF is not leading to a good performance.

Maybe @aernesto could help me out here. I would appreciate your thoughts on this.

The figures below show the PFs after questPlus threshold estimation with the Weibull and contributed StandardWeibull respectively.

initWeibull_performance
standardWeibull_performance

@Duls91
Copy link
Author

Duls91 commented May 28, 2020

Dear David,
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to solve this issue yet.

Could you have a look at it?

Best,
Armin

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants