Invariant object recognition and pose estimation with slow feature analysis

Neural Computation

Volumn 23, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 2289-2323

  Franzius, Mathias ^a,b   Wilbert, Niko ^a   Wiskott, Laurenz ^a,c  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b HONDA RESEARCH INSTITUTE EUROPE GMBH   (Germany)

^c RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; HUMAN; LETTER; PHYSIOLOGY; RECOGNITION; VISION;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; HUMANS; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 80051593771     PISSN: 08997667     EISSN: 1530888X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/NECO_a_00171     Document Type: Letter

References (51)

1. Bartlett, M., & Sejnowski, T. (1998). Learning viewpoint invariant face representations from visual experience in an attractor network. Network: Computation in Neural Systems, 9(3), 399-417.
2. Becker, S. (1999). Implicit learning in 3d object recognition: The importance of temporal context. Neural Computation, 11(2), 347-374.
3. Becker, S., & Zemel, R. S. (2003). Unsupervised learning with global objective functions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Berkes, P. (2005). Handwritten digit recognition with nonlinear Fisher discriminant analysis. In Proceedings of ICANN 2005 (Vol. 2, pp. 285-287). Berlin: Springer.
5. Berkes, P., & Wiskott, L. (2005). Slow feature analysis yields a rich repertoire of complex cell properties. Journal of Vision, 5(6), 579-602. http://journalofvision.org/5/6/9/, doi:10.1167/5.6.9.
6. Booth,M. C., & Rolls, E. T. (1998). View-invariant representations of familiar objects by neurons in the inferior temporal visual cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 8, 510-523.
7. DiCarlo, J., & Cox, D. (2007). Untangling invariant object recognition. Trends in Cognitive Science, 11, 333-341.
8. Einhäuser,W., Hipp, J., Eggert, J., Körner, E., & König, P. (2005). Learning viewpoint invariant object representations using a temporal coherence principle. Biological Cybernetics, 93, 79-90.
9. Földiák, P. (1991). Learning invariance from transformation sequences. Neural Computation, 3, 194-200.
10. Franzius, M., Sprekeler, H., & Wiskott, L. (2007). Slowness and sparseness lead to place, head-direction and spatial-view cells. PLoS Computational Biology, 3(8), e166. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030166.
11. Franzius,M., &Wersing, H. (2010). Learning invariant visual shape representations from physics. In Proceedings of Artificial Neural Networks (pp. 298-302). Berlin: Springer.
12. Franzius, M., Wilbert, N., & Wiskott, L. (2009). Online supplementals. http://www.nikowilbert.de/supplements.
13. Fukushima, K. (1980). Neocognitron: A self-organizing neural network model for a mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position. Biological Cybernetics, 36(4), 193-202.
14. Grill-Spector,K., Kushnir, T.,Hendler, T., Edelman, S., Itzchak,Y.,&Malach, R. (1998). A sequence of object-processing stages revealed by fMRI in human occipital lobe. Human Brain Mapping, 6, 316-328.
15. Hashimoto, W. (2003). Quadratic forms in natural images. Network: Computation in Neural Systems, 14(4), 765-788.
16. Hipp, J., Einhäuser, W., Conradt, J., & König, P. (2005). Learning of somatosensory representations for texture discrimination using a temporal coherence principle. Network: Computation in Neural Systems, 16(2/3), 223-238.
17. Hung, C., Kreiman, G., Poggio, T., & DiCarlo, J. J. (2005). Fast readout of object identity from macaque inferior temporal cortex. Science, 310(5749), 863-866.
18. Jonsson, E., & Felsberg,M. (2007). Accurate interpolation in appearance-based pose estimation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4522, 1.
19. Kayser, C., Einhäuser, W., Dümmer, O., König, P., & Körding, K. (2001). Extracting slow subspaces from natural videos leads to complex cells. In Artificial Neural Networks-ICANN 2001 Proceedings (pp. 1075-1080). Berlin: Springer.
20. Kirstein, S., Wersing, H., & Körner, E. (2005). Rapid online learning of objects in a biologically motivated recognition architecture. In 27th Pattern Recognition Symposium DAGM (pp. 301-308). Berlin: Springer.
21. Kirstein, S.,Wersing, H.,&Körner, E. (2008). Abiologically motivated visual memory architecture for online learning of objects. Neural Networks, 1, 65-77.
22. Legenstein, R., Wilbert, N., & Wiskott, L. (2010). Reinforcement learning on slow features of high-dimensional input streams. PLoS Comput Biol., 6(8), e1000894. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000894. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2F.journal
23. Lehky, S., Peng, X., McAdams, C., & Sereno, A. (2008). Spatial modulation of primate inferotemporal responses by eye position. PLoS ONE, 3(10), e3492. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003492.
24. Li,N., & DiCarlo, J. (2008). Unsupervised natural experience rapidly alters invariant object representation in visual cortex. Science, 321, 1502-1507.
25. Li, N., & DiCarlo, J. (2010). Unsupervised natural experience rapidly reshapes sizeinvariant object representation in inferior temporal cortex. Neuron, 67, 1062-1075.
26. Mel, B. W. (1997). SEEMORE: Combining color, shape and texture histogramming in a neurally-inspired approach to visual object recognition. Neural Computation, 9(4), 777-804.
27. Nayar, S. K., Nene, S. A., & Murase, H. (1996). Real-time 100 object recognition system. In Proc. of ARPA Image Understanding Workshop. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
28. Olshausen, B. A., & Field, D. J. (1996). Natural image statistics and efficient coding. Network: Computation in Neural Systems, 7, 333-339.
29. Rahimi, A.,Recht, B.,&Darrell,T. (2005). Learning appearance manifolds fromvideo. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Vol. 1, pp. 868-875). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
30. Rolls, E. T. (1992). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying face processing within and beyond the temporal cortical visual areas. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 335, 11-21.
31. Rolls, E. T., & Deco, G. (2002). The computational neuroscience of vision. NewYork: Oxford University Press.
32. Rolls, E. T., & Stringer, S. M. (2006). Invariant visual object recognition: A model, with lighting invariance. Journal of Physiology-Paris, 100, 43-62.
33. Rolls, E. T., Tovee, M. J., Purcell, D. G., Stewart, A. L., & Azzopardi, P. (1994). The responses of neurons in the temporal cortex of primates, and face identification and detection. Experimental Brain Research, 101(3), 473-484.
34. Roweis, S., & Saul, L. (2000). Nonlinear dimensionality reduction by locally linear embedding. Science, 290(5500), 2323-2326.
35. Sprekeler, H. (2009). Slowness learning: Mathematical approaches and synaptic mechanisms. Doctoral dissertation, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/docviews/abstract.php?id.-296595.
36. Sprekeler, H., Michaelis, C., & Wiskott, L. (2007). Slowness: An objective for spiketiming-plasticity? PLoS Computational Biology, 3(6), e112.
37. Stone, J. V., & Bray, A. (1995). A learning rule for extracting spatio-temporal invariances. Network: Computation in Neural Systems, 6, 429-436.
38. Stringer, S.M., Perry, G., Rolls, E. T., & Proske, J. H. (2006). Learning invariant object recognition in the visual system with continuous transformations. Biological Cybernetics, 94, 128-142.
39. Stringer, S.M., & Rolls, E. T. (2002). Invariant object recognition in the visual system with novel views of 3D objects. Neural Computation, 14, 2585-2596.
40. Toucan Corporation. (2005). Toucan virtual museum. http://toucan.web.infoseek.co.jp/3DCG/3ds/FishModelsE.html.
41. Ullman, S., & Bart, E. (2004). Recognition invariance obtained by extended and invariant features. Neural Networks, 17, 833-848.
42. Ungerleider, L. G., & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In D. J. Ingle, M. A. Goodale, & R.J.W. Mansfield (Eds.), Analysis of visual behavior (pp. 549-586). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43. Vogels, R. (1999). Effect of image scrambling on inferior temporal cortical responses. NeuroReport, 10, 1811-1816.
44. Wallis, G., & Rolls, E. T. (1997). Invariant face and object recognition in the visual system. Progress in Neurobiology, 51(2), 167-194.
45. Wersing, H.,&Körner, E. (2003). Learning optimized features for hierarchicalmodels of object recognition. Neural Computation, 15(7), 1559-1588.
46. Wiskott, L. (1998). Learning invariance manifolds. In L. Niklasson, M. Bodén, & T. Ziemke (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks (pp. 555-560). Berlin: Springer.
47. Wiskott, L. (2003). Slow feature analysis: A theoretical analysis of optimal free responses. Neural Computation, 15(9), 2147-2177.
48. Wiskott, L. (2006). How does our visual system achieve shift and size invariance? In J. L. van Hemmen & T. J. Sejnowski (Eds.), 23 problems in systems neuroscience (pp. 322-340). New York: Oxford University Press.
49. Wiskott, L., & Sejnowski, T. (2002). Slow feature analysis: Unsupervised learning of invariances. Neural Computation, 14(4), 715-770.
50. Wyss, R., König, P., & Verschure, P. (2006). A model of the ventral visual system based on temporal stability and local memory. PLoS Biology, 4(5), e120.
51. Zito, T.,Wilbert, N.,Wiskott, L.,&Berkes, P. (2008). Modular toolkit for Data Processing (MDP): A Python data processing framework. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 2.