Psychophysical evidence and perceptual observations show that object recognition is not hierarchical but is a parallel, simultaneous, egalitarian, non-computational system.
Gur, M.
Show abstract
Object recognition models have at their core similar essential characteristics: feature extraction and hierarchical convergence leading to a code that is unique to each object and immune to variations in the object appearance. To compare computational, biologically-feasible models to human performance, subjects viewed objects displayed at a wide range of orientations and sizes, and were able to recognize them almost perfectly. These empirical results, together with consideration of thought experiments and analysis of everyday perceptual performance, lead to a conclusion that biologically-plausible object perception models do not even come close to matching our perceptual abilities. We can categorize many thousands of objects, discriminate between enormous numbers of different exemplars within each category, and recognize an object as unique although it may appear in countless variations[-]most of which have never been seen. This seemingly technical, quantitative failure stems from a fundamental property of our perception: the ability to perceive spatial information instantaneously and in parallel, retain details including their relative properties, and yet be able to integrate details into a meaningful percept such as an object. I present an alternative view of object perception whereby objects are represented by responses in primary visual cortex (V1) which is the only cortical area responding to small spatial elements. The rest of the visual cortex is dedicated to scene understanding and interpretation such as constructing 3D percepts from 2D inputs, coding motion, categorization and memories. Since our perception abilities cannot be explained by convergence to "object cells" or by interactions implemented by axonal transmissions, a parallel-to-parallel field-like process is suggested. In this view, spatial information is not modified by multiple neural interactions but is retained by affecting changes in a "neural field" which preserves the identity of individual elements while enabling a new holistic percept when these elements change.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Interaction of contexts in context-dependent orientation estimation 96%
- The amblyopic acuity deficit: impact on the identification of letters distorted by spatial scrambling algorithms 96%
- Visual shape discrimination in goldfish, modelled with the neural circuitry of optic tectum and torus longitudinalis. 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improvement in auditory spatial discrimination from ambiguous visual stimuli is not explained by ideal observer causal inference 94%
- Additive effect of contrast and velocity proves the role of strong excitatory drive in suppression of visual gamma response. 93%
- Three-dimensional shape cues affect human and artificial recognition systems differently 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- A new 'CFS tracking' paradigm reveals uniform suppression depth regardless of target complexity or salience 95%
- A Bayesian and efficient observer model explains concurrent attractive and repulsive history biases in visual perception 95%
- Visual routines for detecting causal interactions are tuned to motion direction 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.