Identifiability and testability in GRT with Individual Differences
Noah H. Silbert, Robin D. Thomas

TL;DR
This paper investigates the limitations of GRT models with individual differences, showing that certain assumptions are necessary for identifiability and proposing refinements to improve model validity.
Contribution
It demonstrates the equivalence of models with different assumptions and provides formal proofs on the non-identifiability of means and variances in GRT models, guiding future model specification.
Findings
GRTwIND with universal perception is equivalent to models with decisional failures and perception failures.
Means and variances are not jointly identifiable in 2x2 GRT models.
Parameter fixing is necessary for model identifiability and interpretability.
Abstract
Silbert and Thomas (2013) showed that failures of decisional separability are not, in general, identifiable in fully parameterized Gaussian GRT models. A recent extension of GRT models (GRTwIND) was developed to solve this problem and a conceptually similar problem with the simultaneous identifiability of means and marginal variances in GRT models. Central to the ability of GRTwIND to solve these problems is the assumption of universal perception, which consists of shared perceptual distributions modified by attentional and global scaling parameters (Soto et al., 2015). If universal perception is valid, GRTwIND solves both issues. In this paper, we show that GRTwIND with universal perception and subject-specific failures of decisional separability is mathematically, and thereby empirically, equivalent to a model with decisional separability and failure of…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
