  We explore the theoretical foundations of a ``twenty questions'' approach to
pattern recognition. The object of the analysis is the computational process
itself rather than probability distributions (Bayesian inference) or decision
boundaries (statistical learning). Our formulation is motivated by applications
to scene interpretation in which there are a great many possible explanations
for the data, one (``background'') is statistically dominant, and it is
imperative to restrict intensive computation to genuinely ambiguous regions.
The focus here is then on pattern filtering: Given a large set Y of possible
patterns or explanations, narrow down the true one Y to a small (random) subset
\hat Y\subsetY of ``detected'' patterns to be subjected to further, more
intense, processing. To this end, we consider a family of hypothesis tests for
Y\in A versus the nonspecific alternatives Y\in A^c. Each test has null type I
error and the candidate sets A\subsetY are arranged in a hierarchy of nested
partitions. These tests are then characterized by scope (|A|), power (or type
II error) and algorithmic cost. We consider sequential testing strategies in
which decisions are made iteratively, based on past outcomes, about which test
to perform next and when to stop testing. The set \hat Y is then taken to be
the set of patterns that have not been ruled out by the tests performed. The
total cost of a strategy is the sum of the ``testing cost'' and the
``postprocessing cost'' (proportional to |\hat Y|) and the corresponding
optimization problem is analyzed.
