Back

Animate-inanimate object categorization from minimal visual information in the human brain, human behavior, and deep neural networks

Spriet, C.; Rostami, F.; Hochmann, J.-R.; Papeo, L.

2025-06-04 neuroscience
10.1101/2025.06.02.657367 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The distinction between animate and inanimate things is a main organizing principle of information in perception and cognition. Yet, animacy, as a visual property, has so far eluded operationalization. Which visual features are necessary and sufficient to see animacy? At which level of the visual hierarchy does the animate-inanimate distinction emerge? Here, we show that the animate-inanimate distinction is preserved even among images of objects that are made unrecognizable and only retain low- and mid-level visual features of their natural version. In particular, in three experiments, healthy human adults saw rapid sequences of images (6 Hz) where every five exemplars of a category (i.e., animate), an exemplar of another category (i.e., inanimate) was shown (1.2 Hz). Using frequency-tagging electroencephalography (ftEEG), we found significant neural responses at 1.2 Hz, indicating rapid and automatic detection of the periodic categorical change. Moreover, such effect was found -although increasingly weaker- for impoverished stimulus-sets that retained only certain (high-, mid-or low-level) features of the original colorful images (i.e., grayscale, texform and phase-scrambled images), and even if the images were unrecognizable. Similar effects were found with two Deep Neural networks (DNNs) presented with the same stimulus-sets. In sum, reliable categorization effects for dramatically impoverished and unrecognizable images, in humans EEG and DNN data, demonstrate that animacy representation emerges early in the visual hierarchy and is remarkably resilient to the loss of visual information.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.