Recurrent processing during object recognition

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 4, Issue APR, 2013, Pages

  O'Reilly, Randall C ^a,b   Wyatte, Dean ^a   Herd, Seth ^a   Mingus, Brian ^a   Jilk, David J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b eCortex Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Computational model; Feedback; Object recognition; Recurrent processing; Winners take all mechanism

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878715548     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00124     Document Type: Article

References (102)

1. Akrami, A., Liu, Y., Treves, A., and Jagadeesh, B. (2009). Converging neuronal activity in inferior temporal cortex during the classification of morphed stimuli. Cereb. Cortex 19, 760-776.
2. Almeida, J., Mahon, B. Z., and Caramazza, A. (2010). The role of the dorsal visual processing stream in tool identification. Psychol. Sci. 21, 772-778.
3. Baylis, G. C., and Driver, J. (2001). Shape-coding in it cells generalizes over contrast and mirror reversal, but not figure-ground reversal. Nat. Neurosci. 4, 937-942.
4. Biederman, I., and Cooper, E. E. (1991). Priming contour-deleted images: evidence for intermediate representations in visual object recognition. Cogn. Psychol. 23, 393-419.
5. Bradski, G., and Grossberg, S. (1995). Fast-learning viewnet architectures for recognizing three-dimensional objects from multiple two-dimensional views. Neural. Netw. 8, 1053-1080.
6. Carandini, M., and Heeger, D. (2012). Normalization as a canonical neural computation. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13, 51-62.
7. Chen, J., and Proctor, R. W. (2012). Influence of category identity on letter matching: conceptual penetration of visual processing or response competition? Attent. Percept. Psychophys. 74, 716-729.
8. Craft, E., Schutze, H., Niebur, E., and der Heydt, R. (2007). A neural model of figure-ground organization. J. Neurophysiol. 97, 4310-4326.
9. Culham, J. C., and Valyear, K. F. (2006). Human parietal cortex in action. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 16, 205-212.
10. Daelli, V., and Treves, A. (2010). Neural attractor dynamics in object recognition. Exp. Brain Res. 203, 241-248.
11. DiCarlo, J. J., Zoccolan, D., and Rust, N. C. (2012). How does the brain solve visual object recognition?. Neuron 73, 415-434.
12. Fei-Fei, L., Fergus, R., and Perona, P. (2007). Learning generative visual models from few training examples: an incremental bayesian approach tested on 101 object categories. Comput. Vis. Image Underst. 106, 59-70.
13. Felleman, D. J., and Van Essen, D. C. (1991). Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. Cereb. Cortex 1, 1-47.
14. Foxe, J. J., and Simpson, G. V. (2002). Flow of activation from v1 to frontal cortex in humans. A framework for defining "early" visual processing. Exp. Brain Res. 142, 139-150.
15. Freedman, D. J., Riesenhuber, M., Poggio, T., and Miller, E. K. (2001). Categorical representation of visual stimuli in the primate prefrontal cortex. Science 291, 312-316.
16. Freedman, D. J., Riesenhuber, M., Poggio, T., and Miller, E. K. (2003). A comparison of primate prefrontal and inferior temporal cortices during visual categorization. J. Neurosci. 23, 5235-5246.
17. Fukushima, K. (1980). Neocognitron: a self-organizing neural network model for a mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position. Biol. Cybern. 36, 193-202.
18. Fukushima, K. (2003). Neocognitron for handwritten digit recognition. Neurocomputing 51, 161-180.
19. Gauthier, I., and Tarr, M. J. (1997). Becoming a "greeble" expert: exploring mechanisms for face recognition. Vision Res. 37, 1673-1682.
20. Gosselin, F., and Schyns, P. G. (2001). Bubbles: a technique to reveal the use of information in recognition tasks. Vision Res. 41, 2261-2271.
21. Gotts, S. J., Milleville, S. C., Bellgowan, P. S. F., and Martin, A. (2011). Broad and narrow conceptual tuning in the human frontal lobes. Cereb. Cortex 21, 477-491.
22. Grill-Spector, K., Kourtzi, Z., and Kanwisher, N. (2001). The lateral occipital complex and its role in object recognition. Vision Res. 41, 1409-1422.
23. Guyonneau, R., Vanrullen, R., and Thorpe, S. J. (2004). Temporal codes and sparse representations: a key to understanding rapid processing in the visual system. J. Physiol. Paris 98, 487-497.
24. Heeger, D. J. (1992). Normalization of cell responses in cat striate cortex. Vis. Neurosci. 9, 181-197.
25. Heeger, D. J. (1993). Modeling simple-cell direction selectivity with normalized, half-squared, linear operators. J. Neurophysiol. 70, 1885-1898.
26. Hinton, G. E., and Salakhutdinov, R. R. (2006). Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science 313, 504-507.
27. Hubel, D., and Wiesel, T. N. (1962). Receptive fields, binocular interaction, and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. J. Physiol. 160, 106-154.
28. Hung, C. P., Kreiman, G., Poggio, T., and DiCarlo, J. J. (2005). Fast readout of object identity from macaque inferior temporal cortex. Science (New York N.Y.) 310, 863-866.
29. Hupe, J. M., James, A. C., Payne, B. R., Lomber, S. G., Girard, P., and Bullier, J. (1998). Cortical feedback improves discrimination between figure and background by v1 v2 and v3 neurons. Nature 394, 784-787.
30. Jarrett, K., Kavukcuoglu, K., Ranzato, M., and LeCun, Y. (2009). What is the best multi-stage architecture for object recognition. in 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision (IEEE), , 2146-2153.
31. Kiani, R., Esteky, H., Mirpour, K., and Tanaka, K. (2007). Object category structure in response patterns of neuronal population in monkey inferior temporal cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 97, 4296-4309.
32. Koivisto, M., Railo, H., Revonsuo, A., Vanni, S., and Salminen-Vaparanta, N. (2011). Recurrent processing in v1/v2 contributes to categorization of natural scenes. J. Neurosci. 31, 2488-2492.
33. Kourtzi, Z., and Kanwisher, N. (2001). Representation of perceived object shape by the human lateral occipital complex. Science 293, 1506-1509.
34. Kriegeskorte, N., Mur, M., Ruff, D. A., Kiani, R., Bodurka, J., Esteky, H., et al. (2008). Matching categorical object representations in inferior temporal cortex of man and monkey. Neuron 60, 1126-1141.
35. Kveraga, K., Ghuman, A., and Bar, M. (2007). Top-down predictions in the cognitive brain. Brain Cogn. 65, 145-168.
36. Lamme, V., and Roelfsema, P. (2000). The distinct modes of vision offered by feedforward and recurrent processing. Trends Neurosci. 23, 571-579.
37. Landauer, T. K., and Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to plato's problem: the latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychol. Rev. 104, 211-240.
38. LeCun, Y., Huang, F., and Bottou, L. (2004). "Learning methods for generic object recognition with invariance to pose and lighting," in Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Vol. 2 (IEEE), 97-104
39. Lee, T. S., and Nguyen, M. (2001). Dynamics of subjective contour formation in the early visual cortex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 98, 1907-1911.
40. Lerner, Y., Hendler, T., and Malach, R. (2002). Object-completion effects in the human lateral occipital complex. Cereb. Cortex 12, 163-177.
41. Li, F. F., VanRullen, R., Koch, C., and Perona, P. (2002). Rapid natural scene categorization in the near absence of attention. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 9596-9601.
42. Lim, S.-L., and Pessoa, L. (2008). Affective learning increases sensitivity to graded emotional faces. Emotion 8, 96-103.
43. Liu, H., Agam, Y., Madsen, J. R., and Kreiman, G. (2009). Timing timing timing: fast decoding of object information from intracranial field potentials in human visual cortex. Neuron 62, 281-290.
44. Logothetis, N. K., Pauls, J., and Poggio, T. (1995). Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys. Curr. Biol. 5, 552-563.
45. Lupyan, G. (2012). Linguistically modulated perception and cognition: the label-feedback hypothesis. Front. Psychol. 3:54. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00054
46. Lupyan, G., and Spivey, M. J. (2008). Perceptual processing is facilitated by ascribing meaning to novel stimuli. Curr. Biol. 18, R410-R412.
47. Lupyan, G., Tompson-Schill, S. L., and Swingley, D. (2010). Conceptual penetration of visual processing. Psychol. Sci. 21, 1-10.
48. Mahon, B., Milleville, S., Negri, G., Rumiati, R., Caramazza, A., and Martin, A. (2007). Action-related properties of objects shape object representations in the ventral stream. Neuron 55, 507-520.
49. Mahon, B. Z., and Caramazza, A. (2011). What drives the organization of object knowledge in the brain? Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 15, 97-103.
50. Marr, D. (1982). Vision. New York: Freeman.
51. Masquelier, T., and Thorpe, S. J. (2007). Unsupervised learning of visual features through spike timing dependent plasticity. PLoS Comput. Biol. 3:e31. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030031
52. McClelland, J. L., and Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 1 an account of basic findings. Psychol. Rev. 88, 375-407.
53. Meyers, E. M., Freedman, D. J., Kreiman, G., Miller, E. K., and Poggio, T. (2008). Dynamic population coding of category information in inferior temporal and prefrontal cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 100, 1407-1419.
54. Mozer, M. C., and Behrmann, M. (1990). On the interaction of selective attention and lexical knowledge: a connectionist account of neglect dyslexia. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 96, 96-123.
55. Mutch, J., and Lowe, D. (2008). Object class recognition and localization using sparse features with limited receptive fields. Int. J. Comput. Vis. 80, 45-57.
56. Nestor, A., Vettel, J. M., and Tarr, M. J. (2008). Task-specific codes for face recognition: how they shape the neural representation of features for detection and individuation. PLoS ONE 3:e3978. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003978
57. Nowak, L., and Bullier, J. (1997). "The timing of information transfer in the visual system,". in Extrastriate Cortex in Primates, Cerebral Cortex, Vol. 12, eds K. S. Rockl, J. H. Kaas, and A. Peters (New York: Plenum Press), 205-241.
58. Olshausen, B. A., and Field, D. J. (2004). Sparse coding of sensory inputs. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14, 481-487.
59. Oram, M. W., and Perrett, D. I. (1992). Time course of neural responses discriminating different views of the face and head. J. Neurophysiol. 68, 70-84.
60. Orban, G. A., Van Essen, D., and Vanduffel, W. (2004). Comparative mapping of higher visual areas in monkeys and humans. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 8, 315-324.
61. O'Reilly, R. C. (1996). Biologically plausible error-driven learning using local activation differences: the generalized recirculation algorithm. Neural. Comput. 8, 895-938.
62. O'Reilly, R. C. (1998). Six principles for biologically-based computational models of cortical cognition. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 2, 455-462.
63. O'Reilly, R. C. (2001). Generalization in interactive networks: the benefits of inhibitory competition and Hebbian learning. Neural. Comput. 13, 1199-1242.
64. O'Reilly, R. C., and Munakata, Y. (2000). Computational Explorations in Cognitive Neuroscience: Understanding the Mind by Simulating the Brain. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
65. O'Reilly, R. C., Munakata, Y., Frank, M. J., Hazy, T. E., and Contributors (2012). Computational Cognitive Neuroscience, 1st Edn. Wiki Book. Available at: http://ccnbook.colorado.edu
66. Padmala, S., and Pessoa, L. (2008). Affective learning enhances visual detection and responses in primary visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 28, 6202-6210.
67. Patterson, K., Nestor, P. J., and Rogers, T. T. (2007). Where do you know what you know? The representation of semantic knowledge in the human brain. Nat. Rev. 8, 976-987.
68. Pinto, N., Barhomi, Y., Cox, D., and DiCarlo, J. (2011). "Comparing state-of-the-art visual features on invariant object recognition tasks," in 2011 IEEE Workshop on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) (IEEE), 463-470.
69. Pinto, N., Cox, D. D., and DiCarlo, J. J. (2008). Why is real-world visual object recognition hard? PLoS Comput. Biol. 4:e27. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0040027
70. Pinto, N., Doukhan, D., DiCarlo, J. J., and Cox, D. D. (2009). A high-throughput screening approach to discovering good forms of biologically inspired visual representation. PLoS Comput. Biol. 5:e1000579. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000579
71. Ponce, J., Berg, T., Everingham, M., Forsyth, D., Hebert, M., Lazebnik, S., et al. (2006). Dataset issues in object recognition. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 4170, 29-48.
72. Poort, J., Raudies, F., Wannig, A., Lamme, V. A. F., Neumann, H., and Roelfsema, P. R. (2012). The role of attention in figure-ground segregation in areas v1 and v4 of the visual cortex. Neuron 75, 143-156.
73. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychol. Rev. 85, 59-107.
74. Ratcliff, R., and McKoon, G. (2008). The diffusion decision model: theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural. Comput. 20, 873-922.
75. Rauschenberger, R., Liu, T., Slotnick, S. D., and Yantis, S. (2006). Temporally unfolding neural representation of pictorial occlusion. Psychol. Sci. 17, 358-364.
76. Riesenhuber, M., and Poggio, T. (1999). Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 3, 1199-1204.
77. Riesenhuber, M., and Poggio, T. (2002). Neural mechanisms of object recognition. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 12, 162-168.
78. Roelfsema, P. R., Lamme, V. A. F., Spekreijse, H., and Bosch, H. (2002). Figure-ground segregation in a recurrent network architecture. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 14, 525-537.
79. Roland, P. (2010). Six principles of visual cortical dynamics. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 4:28 doi:10.3389/fnsys.2010.00028
80. Rolls, E. T., and Stringer, S. M. (2006). Invariant visual object recognition: a model, with lighting invariance. J. Physiol. Paris 100, 43-62.
81. Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., and Williams, R. J. (1986). Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature 323, 533-536.
82. Scannell, J., Blakemore, C., and Young, M. P. (1995). Analysis of connectivity in the cat cerebral cortex. J. Neurosci. 15, 1463-1483.
83. Scholte, H. S., Jolij, J., Fahrenfort, J. J., and Lamme, V. A. F. (2008). Feedforward and recurrent processing in scene segmentation: electroencephalography and functional magnetic resonance imaging. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 20, 2097-2109.
84. Seghier, M. L., and Vuilleumier, P. (2006). Functional neuroimaging findings on the human perception of illusory contours. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 30, 595-612.
85. Serre, T., Kreiman, G., Kouh, M., Cadieu, C., Knoblich, U., and Poggio, T. (2007a). A quantitative theory of immediate visual recognition. Prog. Brain Res. 165, 33-56.
86. Serre, T., Oliva, A., and Poggio, T. (2007b). A feedforward architecture accounts for rapid categorization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 6424-6429.
87. Serre, T., Wolf, L., Bileschi, S., Riesenhuber, M., and Poggio, T. (2007c). Robust object recognition with cortex-like mechanisms. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 29, 411-426.
88. Sigala, N., and Logothetis, N. K. (2002). Visual categorization shapes feature selectivity in the primate temporal cortex. Nature 415, 318-320.
89. Sporns, O., Honey, C. J., and Kotter, R. (2007). Identification and classification of hubs in brain networks. PLoS ONE 2:e1049. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001049
90. Sporns, O., and Zwi, J. D. (2004). The small world of the cerebral cortex. Neuroinformatics 2, 145-162.
91. Tanaka, K. (1996). Inferotemporal cortex and object vision. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 19, 109-139.
92. Thorpe, S., Fize, D., and Marlot, C. (1996). Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 381, 520-522.
93. Tompa, T., and Sary, G. (2010). A review on the inferior temporal cortex of the macaque. Brain Res. Rev. 62, 165-182.
94. Ungerleider, L. G., and Haxby, J. V. (1994). "What" and "Where" in the human brain. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 4, 157-165.
95. Vanrullen, R. (2007). The power of the feed-forward sweep. Adv. Cogn. Psychol. 3, 167-176.
96. VanRullen, R., and Koch, C. (2003). Visual selective behavior can be triggered by a feed-forward process. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 15, 209-217.
97. Vuilleumier, P. (2005). How brains beware: neural mechanisms of emotional attention. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 9, 585-594.
98. Wallis, G., and Rolls, E. T. (1997). Invariant face and object recognition in the visual system. Prog. Neurobiol. 51, 167-194.
99. Weigelt, S., Singer, W., and Muckli, L. (2007). Separate cortical stages in amodal completion revealed by functional magnetic resonance adaptation. BMC Neurosci. 8:70. doi:10.1186/1471-2202-8-70
100. Wyatte, D., Curran, T., and O'Reilly, R. (2012a). The limits of feedforward vision: recurrent processing promotes robust object recognition when objects are degraded. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 24, 2248-2261.
101. Wyatte, D., Herd, S., Mingus, B., and O'Reilly, R. (2012b). The role of competitive inhibition and top-down feedback in binding during object recognition. Front. Psychol. 3:182. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00182
102. Zhaoping, L. (2005). Border ownership from intracortical interactions in visual area v2. Neuron 47, 143-153.