Clutter does not affect the spatial tuning of * category representations in human object-selective cortex *
Matic, K.; Tafech, I.; Pettini, L.; Hirschhorn, R.; Görgen, K.; König, P.; Cichy, R. M.; Haynes, J.-D.
Show abstract
Natural vision is frequently impaired when the visual field is crowded with multiple competing objects. One common interpretation of this clutter interference is that large receptive fields in high-level visual cortex make it hard to separate objects from their surround. This view predicts less interference for spatially localized representations; therefore, classifiers trained under clutter might rely more on such localized representations. Here we tested this by measuring participants brain signals with fMRI while they viewed objects presented either alone or within cluttered arrays. Consistent with prior work, category decoding accuracy was significantly reduced in clutter. However, classifiers trained directly on cluttered displays were not spatially more localized. Instead, they generalized robustly across spatial positions, comparable to classifiers trained on isolated objects. This finding challenges the idea that clutter preferentially disrupts position-tolerant representations.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Attention hinges on tuned normalization strength within human visual cortex 97%
- Conscious perception of natural images is constrained by category-related visual features 97%
- Unsupervised learning as a computational principle works in visual learning of natural scenes, but not of artificial stimuli 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Spatiotemporal representations of contextual associations for real-world objects 96%
- Learning what is irrelevant or relevant: Expectations facilitate distractor inhibition and target facilitation through distinct neural mechanisms 95%
- Implicit learning and exploitation of regularities involve hippocampal and prefrontal theta activity 95%
Similar papers in this journal
"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.