Getting real-sensory processing of natural stimuli

Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 389-395

  Einhäuser, Wolfgang ^a   König, Peter ^b  

^a PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSNABRÜCK   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRAIN FUNCTION; EYE MOVEMENT; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMAN; MACHINE LEARNING; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; PERCEPTION; PLASTICITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEPTIVE FIELD; REVIEW; SENSORY STIMULATION; SENSORY SYSTEM; SIGNAL PROCESSING; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL SYSTEM;

ANIMALS; CEREBRAL CORTEX; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; NEUROPHYSIOLOGY; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOPHYSICS; SENSATION; SENSORY RECEPTOR CELLS;

EID: 77954763026     PISSN: 09594388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2010.03.010     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. Felsen G., Dan Y. A natural approach to studying vision. Nat Neurosci 2005, 8:1643-1646.
2. Geisler W.S. Visual perception and the statistical properties of natural scenes. Annu Rev Psychol 2008, 59:167-192.
3. Quack T., Leibe B., Van Gool L. World-scale mining of objects and events from community photo collections. Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on Content-based image and video retrieval 2008, 47-56.
4. Einhäuser W., Moeller G.U., Schumann F., Conradt J., Vockeroth J., Bartl K., Schneider E., König P. Eye-head coordination during free exploration in human and cat. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2009, 1164:353-366.
5. Ohayon S., Harmening W.M., Wagner H., Rivlin E. Through a barn owl's eyes: interactions between scene content and visual attention. Biol Cybern 2008, 98:115-132.
6. de Boer E. Reverse Correlation I. Proc KNAW C 1968, 71:472-488.
7. Willmore B., Smyth D. Methods for first-order kernel estimation: simple-cell receptive fields from responses to natural scenes. Network 2003, 14:553-577.
8. Neri P., Levi D.M. Receptive versus perceptive fields from the reverse-correlation viewpoint. Vision Res 2006, 46:2465-2474.
9. Koch C., Ullman S. Shifts in selective visual attention: towards the underlying neural circuitry. Hum Neurobiol 1985, 4:219-227.
10. Itti L., Koch C. Computational modelling of visual attention. Nat Rev Neurosci 2001, 2:194-203.
11. Engmann S., 't Hart B.M., Sieren T., Onat S., König P., Einhäuser W. Saliency on a natural scene background: effects of color and luminance contrast add linearly. Atten Percept Psychophys 2009, 71:1337-1352.
12. Liu H., Agam Y., Madsen J.R., Kreiman G. Timing, timing, timing: fast decoding of object information from intracranial field potentials in human visual cortex. Neuron 2009, 62:281-290.
13. Vinje W.E., Gallant J.L. Sparse coding and decorrelation in primary visual cortex during natural vision. Science 2000, 287:1273-1276.
14. Quian Quiroga R., Panzeri S. Extracting information from neuronal populations: information theory and decoding approaches. Nat Rev Neurosci 2009, 10:173-185.
15. Kay K.N., Naselaris T., Prenger R.J., Gallant J.L. Identifying natural images from human brain activity. Nature 2008, 452:352-355.
16. Naselaris T., Prenger R.J., Kay K.N., Oliver M., Gallant J.L. Bayesian reconstruction of natural images from human brain activity. Neuron 2009, 63:902-915.
17. Kienzle W., Franz M.O., Schölkopf B., Wichmann F.A. Center-surround patterns emerge as optimal predictors for human saccade targets. J Vis 2009, 9(5):1-15. 10.1167/9.5.7.
18. Seo H.J., Milanfar P. Static and space-time visual saliency detection by self-resemblance. J Vis 2009, 9(12):1-27. 10.1167/9.12.15.
19. Elazary L., Itti L. Interesting objects are visually salient. J Vis 2008, 8(3):1-15. 10.1167/8.3.3.
20. Einhäuser W., Spain M., Perona P. Objects predict fixations better than early saliency. J Vis 2008, 8(14):1-26. 10.1167/8.14.18.
21. Birbaumer N., Ghanayim N., Hinterberger T., Iversen I., Kotchoubey B., Kübler A., Perelmouter J., Taub E., Flor H. A spelling device for the paralysed. Nature 1999, 398:297-298.
22. Blankertz B., Losch F., Krauledat M., Dornhege G., Curio G., Müller K.R. The Berlin Brain - Computer Interface: accurate performance from first-session in BCI-naïve subjects. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2008, 55:2452-2462.
23. Bigdely-Shamlo N., Vankov A., Ramirez R.R., Makeig S. On brain activity-based image classification during rapid serial visual presentation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2008, 16:432-441.
24. James W. The Principles of Psychology, vol. 1 1890, Henry Holt, New York, 403-404.
25. Navalpakkam V., Itti L. Modeling the influence of task on attention. Vision Res 2005, 45:205-231.
26. Einhäuser W., Rutishauser U., Koch C. Task-demands can immediately reverse the effects of sensory-driven saliency in complex visual stimuli. J Vis 2008, 8(2):1-19. 10.1167/8.2.2.
27. Ehinger K.A., Hidalgo-Sotelo B., Torralba A., Oliva A. Modeling Search for People in 900 Scenes: a combined source model of eye guidance. PVIS 2009, 17:945-978.
28. Barlow H.B. Possible principles underlying the transformation of sensory messages. Sensory Communication 1961, 217-234. MIT Press, Cambridge. W.A. Rosenblith (Ed.).
29. Olshausen B.A., Field D.J. Emergence of simple-cell receptive field properties by learning a sparse code for natural images. Nature 1996, 381:607-609.
30. Garrigues P.J., Olshausen B.A. Learning horizontal connections in a sparse coding model of natural images. Advances in Information Processing Systems 2008, vol. 20:505-512. MIT Press.
31. Waydo S., Kraskov A., Quian Quiroga R., Fried I., Koch C. Sparse representation in the human medial temporal lobe. J Neurosci 2006, 26:10232-10234.
32. Eichhorn J., Sinz F., Bethge M. Natural image coding in V1: how much use is orientation selectivity?. PLoS Comp Biol 2009, 5:e1000336. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000336.
33. Schwartz O., Sejnowski T., Dayan P. Perceptual organization in the tilt illusion. J Vis 2009, 9(19):1-20. 10.1167/9.4.19.
34. Földiak P. Learning invariance from transformation sequences. Neural Comput 1991, 3:194-200.
35. Wyss R., König P., Verschure P.F. A model of the ventral visual system based on temporal stability and local memory. PloS Biol 2006, 4:e120. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040120.
36. Franzius M., Sprekeler H., Wiskott L. Slowness and sparseness lead to place, head-direction, and spatial-view cells. PLoS Comp Biol 2007, 3:e166. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030166.
37. Li N., DiCarlo J.J. Unsupervised natural experience rapidly alters invariant object representation in visual cortex. Science 2008, 321:1502-1507.
38. Gao D., Vasconcelos N. Decision-theoretic saliency: computational principles, biological plausibility, and implications for neurophysiology and psychophysics. Neural Comput 2009, 21:239-271.
39. Najemnik J., Geisler W.S. Eye movement statistics in humans are consistent with an optimal search strategy. J Vis 2008, 8(4):1-14. 10.1167/8.3.4.
40. Zhang L., Tong M.H., Marks T.K., Shan H., Cottrell G.W. SUN: a Bayesian framework for saliency using natural statistics. J Vis 2008, 8(32):1-20. 10.1167/8.7.32.
41. Bruce N.D., Tsotsos J.K. Saliency, attention, and visual search: an information theoretic approach. J Vis 2009, 9(5):1-24. 10.1167/9.3.5.
42. Yau J.M., Pasupathy A., Fitzgerald P.J., Hsiao S.S., Connor C.E. Analogous intermediate shape coding in vision and touch. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009, 106:16457-16462.
43. David S.V., Gallant J.L. Predicting neuronal responses during natural vision. Network: Comput Neural Syst 2005, 16:239-260.
44. Yao H., Shi L., Han F., Gao H., Dan Y. Rapid learning in cortical coding of visual scenes. Nat Neurosci 2007, 10:772-778.
45. Fiser J. Perceptual learning and representational learning in humans and animals. Learn Behav 2009, 37:141-153.
46. Tanaka K. Neuronal mechanisms of object recognition. Science 1993, 262:685-688.
47. Hegdé J., Van Essen D.C. A comparative study of shape representation in macaque visual areas v2 and v4. Cereb Cortex 2007, 17:1100-1116.
48. Ullman S., Vidal-Naquet M., Sali E. Visual features of intermediate complexity and their use in classification. Nat Neurosci 2002, 5:682-687.
49. Elder J.H., Velisavljević L. Cue dynamics underlying rapid detection of animals in natural scenes. J Vis 2009, 9(7):1-20. 10.1167/9.7.7.
50. Gu C., Lim J.J., Arbelaez P., Malik J. Recognition using regions. CVPR 2009, 1030-1037.
51. Ommer B., Buhmann J.M. Learning the compositional nature of Visual Categoies for Recognition. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 2010, 42:501-515.
52. Fergus R., Perona P., Zisserman A. Object class recognition by unsupervised scale-invariant learning. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, vol. 2 2003, II-264-II-271.
53. Biederman I. Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. Psychol Rev 1987, 94:115-147.
54. Kim J.G., Biederman I., Lescroart M.D., Hayworth K.J. Adaptation to objects in the lateral occipital complex (LOC): shape or semantics?. Vision Res 2009, 49:2297-2305.
55. Ross M.G., Oliva A. Estimating perception of scene layout properties from global image features. J Vis 2010, 10(2):1-25. 10.1167/10.1.2.
56. Hoiem D., Efros A., Hebert M. Recovering surface layout from an image. Int J Comput Vis 2007, 75:151-172.
57. Tu Z., Chen X., Yuille A.L., Zhu S.-C. Image parsing: unifying segmentation, detection, and recognition. Ninth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Proceedings, vol. 1 2003, 18-25.
58. Wolfe J.M., Bennett S.C. Preattentive object files: shapeless bundles of basic features. Vision Res 1997, 37:25-43.
59. Geisler W.S., Najemnik J., Ing A.D. Optimal stimulus encoders for natural tasks. J Vis 2009, 9(17):1-16. 10.1167/9.13.17.
60. Berman R., Colby C. Attention and active vision. Vision Res 2009, 49:1233-1248.
61. Saenz M., Lewis L.B., Huth A.G., Fine I., Koch C. Visual motion area MT+/V5 responds to auditory motion in human sight-recovery subjects. J Neurosci 2008, 28:5141-5148.
62. Nagel S., Carl C., Kringe T., Märtin R., König P. Beyond sensory substitution-learning the sixth sense. J Neural Eng 2005, 2:R13-R26.
63. Betz T, Kietzmann TC, Wilming N and König P: Investigating task-dependent top-down effects on overt visual attention. 2010, http://journalofvision.org/10/3/15/.