Abstract

Visual object recognition is remarkably accurate and robust, yet its neurophysiological underpinnings are poorly understood. Single cells in brain regions thought to underlie object recognition code for many stimulus aspects, which poses a limit on their invariance. Combining the responses of multiple non-invariant neurons via weighted linear summation offers an optimal decoding strategy, which may be able to achieve invariant object recognition. However, because object identification is essentially parameter optimization in this model, the characteristics of the identification task trained to perform are critically important. If this task does not require invariance, a neural population-code is inherently more selective but less tolerant than the single-neurons constituting the population. Nevertheless, tolerance can be learned – provided that it is trained for – at the cost of selectivity. We argue that this model is an interesting null-hypothesis to compare behavioral results with and conclude that it may explain several experimental findings.

Highlights

  • Visual object recognition is remarkably accurate and robust, yet its neurophysiological underpinnings are poorly understood

  • Single cells in brain regions thought to underlie object recognition code for many stimulus aspects, which poses a limit on their invariance

  • Due to the overwhelming number of different retinal images any given object can produce – reflecting variations in object and/or viewer position, light configuration and scene context – object identification requires a high degree of tolerance for such changes

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Visual object recognition is remarkably accurate and robust, yet its neurophysiological underpinnings are poorly understood. Neural population-codes may underlie behavioral invariance Traditional views on the relation between behavioral performance and single cell characteristics emphasize the importance of each neuron in signaling the presence or absence of a particular feature in the visual stimulus (Barlow, 1972).

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.