The Invariance Hypothesis Implies Domain-Specific Regions in Visual Cortex

PLoS Computational Biology

Volumn 11, Issue 10, 2015, Pages

  Leibo, Joel Z ^a,b   Liao, Qianli ^a,b   Anselmi, Fabio ^a,b,c   Poggio, Tomaso ^a,b,c  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c ISTITUTO ITALIANO DI TECNOLOGIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER VISION; MACHINERY;

CONDITION; DISCRIMINABILITY; DOMAIN SPECIFIC; OBJECT CLASS; PRIOR-KNOWLEDGE; PROCESSING MACHINERY; PROPERTY; RECOGNITION SYSTEMS; VENTRAL STREAMS; VISUAL CORTEXES;

METADATA;

ARTICLE; BRAIN REGION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOMAIN SPECIFIC REGION; FUSIFORM FACE AREA; HYPOTHESIS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; NEUROANATOMY; PREDICTION; THEORETICAL MODEL; VISUAL CORTEX; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMAN; NERVE CELL NETWORK; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; RECOGNITION; VISUAL SYSTEM;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; NERVE NET; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL PATHWAYS;

EID: 84946068475     PISSN: 1553734X     EISSN: 15537358     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004390     Document Type: Article

References (114)

1. Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun MM, The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. The Journal of Neuroscience. 1997;17(11):4302. Available from: http://www.jneurosci.org/content/17/11/4302.short 9151747
2. Tsao DY, Freiwald WA, Knutsen TA, Mandeville JB, Tootell RBH, Faces and objects in macaque cerebral cortex. Nature Neuroscience. 2003;6(9):989–995. Available from: http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v6/n9/abs/nn1111.html doi: 10.1038/nn1111 12925854
3. Ku SP, Tolias AS, Logothetis NK, Goense J, fMRI of the Face-Processing Network in the Ventral Temporal Lobe of Awake and Anesthetized Macaques. Neuron. 2011;70(2):352–362. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0896627311002054 doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.02.048 21521619
4. Cohen L, Dehaene S, Naccache L, The visual word form area. Brain. 2000;123(2):291. Available from: http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/123/2/291.short doi: 10.1093/brain/123.2.291 10648437
5. Baker CI, Liu J, Wald LL, Kwong KK, Benner T, Kanwisher N, Visual word processing and experiential origins of functional selectivity in human extrastriate cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2007;104(21):9087. Available from: http://www.pnas.org/content/104/21/9087.short doi: 10.1073/pnas.0703300104
6. Downing P, Jiang Y, A cortical area selective for visual processing of the human body. Science. 2001;293(5539):2470. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/293/5539/2470.short doi: 10.1126/science.1063414 11577239
7. Spiridon M, Kanwisher N, How distributed is visual category information in human occipito-temporal cortex? An fMRI study. Neuron. 2002;35(6):1157–1165. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00877-2 doi: 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00877-2 12354404
8. Kanwisher N, Functional specificity in the human brain: a window into the functional architecture of the mind. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2010;107(25):11163. Available from: http://www.pnas.org/content/107/25/11163.short doi: 10.1073/pnas.1005062107
9. Ishai A, Ungerleider LG, Martin A, Schouten JL, Haxby JV, Distributed representation of objects in the human ventral visual pathway. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1999;96(16):9379–9384. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.16.9379 doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.16.9379
10. Haxby JV, Gobbini MI, Furey ML, Ishai A, Schouten JL, Pietrini P, Distributed and overlapping representations of faces and objects in ventral temporal cortex. Science. 2001;293(5539):2425. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/293/5539/2425.short doi: 10.1126/science.1063736 11577229
11. Kravitz DJ, Saleem KS, Baker CI, Ungerleider LG, Mishkin M, The ventral visual pathway: an expanded neural framework for the processing of object quality. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2013;17(1):26–49. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.10.011 doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2012.10.011 23265839
12. Plaut DC, Behrmann M, Complementary neural representations for faces and words: A computational exploration. Cognitive neuropsychology. 2011;28(3-4):251–275. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2011.609812 doi: 10.1080/02643294.2011.609812 22185237
13. Levy I, Hasson U, Avidan G, Hendler T, Malach R, Center–periphery organization of human object areas. Nature neuroscience. 2001;4(5):533–539. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/87490 11319563
14. Hasson U, Levy I, Behrmann M, Hendler T, Malach R, Eccentricity bias as an organizing principle for human high-order object areas. Neuron. 2002;34(3):479–490. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00662-1 doi: 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00662-1 11988177
15. Malach R, Levy I, Hasson U, The topography of high-order human object areas. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2002;6(4):176–184. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1364-6613(02)01870-3 doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01870-3 11912041
16. Konkle T, Oliva A, A real-world size organization of object responses in occipitotemporal cortex. Neuron. 2012;74(6):1114–1124. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.04.036 doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.04.036 22726840
17. Lafer-Sousa R, Conway BR, Parallel, multi-stage processing of colors, faces and shapes in macaque inferior temporal cortex. Nature Neuroscience. 2013;16(12):1870–1878. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn.3555 doi: 10.1038/nn.3555 24141314
18. Barlow HB, Possible principles underlying the transformation of sensory messages. Sensory communication. 1961;p. 217–234. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262518420.003.0013
19. Marr D, Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Co., Inc.; 1982. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262514620.001.0001
20. Simoncelli EP, Olshausen BA, Natural image statistics and neural representation. Annual Review of Neuroscience. 2001;24(1):1193–1216. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0954-898x/7/2/014 doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.1193 11520932
21. Poggio T, Mutch J, Anselmi F, Leibo JZ, Rosasco L, Tacchetti A. The computational magic of the ventral stream: sketch of a theory (and why some deep architectures work). MIT-CSAIL-TR-2012-035. 2012; Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/76248
22. DiCarlo JJ, Zoccolan D, Rust NC, How does the brain solve visual object recognition? Neuron. 2012;73(3):415–434. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089662731200092X doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.01.010 22325196
23. Gauthier I, Tarr MJ, Anderson AW, Skudlarski P, Gore JC, Activation of the middle fusiform ‘face area’ increases with expertise in recognizing novel objects. nature neuroscience. 1999;2(6):569. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/9224 doi: 10.1038/9224
24. Tarr MJ, Gauthier I, FFA: a flexible fusiform area for subordinate-level visual processing automatized by expertise. Nature Neuroscience. 2000;3:764–770. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/77666 doi: 10.1038/77666 10903568
25. Palmeri TJ, Wong AC, Gauthier I, Computational approaches to the development of perceptual expertise. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2004;8(8):378–386. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.06.001 doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.06.001 15335465
26. Dailey MN, Cottrell GW, Organization of face and object recognition in modular neural network models. Neural Networks. 1999;12(7-8):1053–1074. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/s0893-6080(99)00050-7 doi: 10.1016/S0893-6080(99)00050-7 12662645
27. Wallis G, Toward a unified model of face and object recognition in the human visual system. Frontiers in psychology. 2013;4(497). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00497
28. Mahon BZ, Caramazza A, What drives the organization of object knowledge in the brain? Trends in cognitive sciences. 2011;15(3):97–103. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.004 doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.004 21317022
29. Wada Y, Yamamoto T, Selective impairment of facial recognition due to a haematoma restricted to the right fusiform and lateral occipital region. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 2001;71(2):254–257. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.71.2.254 doi: 10.1136/jnnp.71.2.254
30. Barton JJ, Press DZ, Keenan JP, O?Connor M, Lesions of the fusiform face area impair perception of facial configuration in prosopagnosia. Neurology. 2002;58(1):71–78. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/wnl.58.1.71 doi: 10.1212/WNL.58.1.71 11781408
31. Yin RK, Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of experimental psychology. 1969;81(1):141. doi: 10.1037/h0027474
32. Tanaka J, Farah M, Parts and wholes in face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1993;46(2):225–245. doi: 10.1080/14640749308401045 8316637
33. Huth AG, Nishimoto S, Vu AT, Gallant JL, A continuous semantic space describes the representation of thousands of object and action categories across the human brain. Neuron. 2012;76(6):1210–1224. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.10.014 23259955
34. Freiwald WA, Tsao DY, Functional Compartmentalization and Viewpoint Generalization Within the Macaque Face-Processing System. Science. 2010;330(6005):845. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/330/6005/845 doi: 10.1126/science.1194908 21051642
35. Moeller S, Freiwald WA, Tsao DY, Patches with links: a unified system for processing faces in the macaque temporal lobe. Science. 2008;320(5881):1355. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/320/5881/1355.short doi: 10.1126/science.1157436 18535247
36. Tsao DY, Freiwald WA, Tootell RBH, Livingstone MS, A cortical region consisting entirely of face-selective cells. Science. 2006;311(5761):670. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/311/5761/670.short doi: 10.1126/science.1119983 16456083
37. Anselmi F, Leibo JZ, Mutch J, Rosasco L, Tacchetti A, Poggio T. Unsupervised Learning of Invariant Representations in Hierarchical Architectures. arXiv preprint. 2013; Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.4158v5
38. Sundaramoorthi G, Petersen P, Varadarajan VS, Soatto S. On the set of images modulo viewpoint and contrast changes. In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2009. p. 832–839.
39. Poggio T, Mutch J, Isik L. Computational role of eccentricity dependent cortical magnification. CBMM Memo No 017 arXiv preprint arXiv:14061770. 2014;.
40. Liao Q, Leibo JZ, Poggio T. Learning invariant representations and applications to face verification. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS). Lake Tahoe, CA; 2013.
41. Liao Q, Leibo JZ, Mroueh Y, Poggio T. Can a biologically-plausible hierarchy effectively replace face detection, alignment, and recognition pipelines? CBMM Memo No 3 arXiv preprint arXiv:13114082. 2013;.
42. Liao Q, Leibo JZ, Poggio T. Unsupervised learning of clutter-resistant visual representations from natural videos. CBMM Memo No 023 arXiv preprint arXiv:14093879. 2014;.
43. Evangelopoulos G, Voinea S, Zhang C, Rosasco L, Poggio T. Learning An Invariant Speech Representation. arXiv preprint arXiv:14063884. 2014;.
44. Voinea S, Zhang C, Evangelopoulos G, Rosasco L, Poggio T. Word-level Invariant Representations From Acoustic Waveforms. In: Fifteenth Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association; 2014.
45. Poggio T, Mutch J, Anselmi F, Tacchetti A, Rosasco L, Leibo JZ. Does invariant recognition predict tuning of neurons in sensory cortex? MIT-CSAIL-TR-2013-019, CBCL-313. 2013;.
46. Leibo JZ. The Invariance Hypothesis and the Ventral Stream. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2013. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/87458
47. Isik L, Leibo JZ, Mutch J, Lee SW, Poggio T. A hierarchical model of peripheral vision. MIT-CSAIL-TR-2011-031, CBCL-300. 2011; Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/64621
48. Fodor JA, The modularity of mind: An essay on faculty psychology. MIT press; 1983.
49. Kanwisher N, et al. Domain specificity in face perception. Nature neuroscience. 2000;3:759–763. doi: 10.1038/77664 10903567
50. Gauthier I, What constrains the organization of the ventral temporal cortex? Trends in cognitive sciences. 2000;4(1):1–2. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01416-3 10637614
51. Hubel DH, Wiesel TN, Uniformity of monkey striate cortex: a parallel relationship between field size, scatter, and magnification factor. The Journal of Comparative Neurology. 1974;158(3):295–305. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cne.901580305/abstract doi: 10.1002/cne.901580305 4436457
52. Douglas RJ, Martin KAC, Whitteridge D, A canonical microcircuit for neocortex. Neural Computation. 1989;1(4):480–488. Available from: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/neco.1989.1.4.480 doi: 10.1162/neco.1989.1.4.480
53. Fukushima K, Neocognitron: A self-organizing neural network model for a mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position. Biological Cybernetics. 1980 Apr;36(4):193–202. Available from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/r6g5w3tt54528137 doi: 10.1007/BF00344251 7370364
54. Mel BW, SEEMORE: Combining Color, Shape, and Texture Histogramming in a Neurally Inspired Approach to Visual Object Recognition. Neural Computation. 1997 May;9(4):777–804. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/neco.1997.9.4.777 http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/neco.1997.9.4.777 doi: 10.1162/neco.1997.9.4.777 9161022
55. Riesenhuber M, Poggio T, Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neuroscience. 1999 Nov;2(11):1019–1025. Available from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.46.7843&rep=rep1&type=pdf doi: 10.1038/14819 10526343
56. Mutch J, Lowe D, Multiclass object recognition with sparse, localized features. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 2006. 2006;1:11–18. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1640736
57. Serre T, Wolf L, Bileschi S, Riesenhuber M, Poggio T, Robust Object Recognition with Cortex-Like Mechanisms. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. 2007;29(3):411–426. doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2007.56 17224612
58. Pinto N, Doukhan D, DiCarlo J, Cox D, A high-throughput screening approach to discovering good forms of biologically inspired visual representation. PLoS Computational Biology. 2009;5(11). doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000579 19956750
59. LeCun Y, Matan O, Boser B, Denker JS, Henderson D, Howard R, et al. Handwritten zip code recognition with multilayer networks. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Pattern Recognition. vol. 2. IEEE; 1990. p. 35–40.
60. Rolls E, Invariant visual object and face recognition: neural and computational bases, and a model, VisNet. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience. 2012;6. doi: 10.3389/fncom.2012.00035 22723777
61. LeCun Y, Huang FJ, Bottou L. Learning methods for generic object recognition with invariance to pose and lighting. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2004. p. 90–97.
62. Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Hinton G. ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In: Advances in neural information processing systems. vol. 25. Lake Tahoe, CA; 2012. p. 1106–1114.
63. Földiák P. Learning invariance from transformation sequences. Neural Computation. 1991;3(2):194–200. Available from: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/neco.1991.3.2.194
64. Wiskott L, Sejnowski TJ, Slow feature analysis: Unsupervised learning of invariances. Neural computation. 2002;14(4):715–770. Available from: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/089976602317318938 doi: 10.1162/089976602317318938 11936959
65. Stringer SM, Rolls ET, Invariant object recognition in the visual system with novel views of 3D objects. Neural Computation. 2002;14(11):2585–2596. Available from: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/089976602760407982 doi: 10.1162/089976602760407982 12433291
66. Spratling M, Learning viewpoint invariant perceptual representations from cluttered images. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. 2005;27(5):753–761. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1407878 doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2005.105 15875796
67. Isik L, Leibo JZ, Poggio T, Learning and disrupting invariance in visual recognition with a temporal association rule. Front Comput Neurosci. 2012;6(37). Available from: http://www.frontiersin.org/Computational_Neuroscience/10.3389/fncom.2012.00037/abstract doi: 10.3389/fncom.2012.00037 22754523
68. Webb TJ, Rolls E, Deformation-specific and deformation-invariant visual object recognition: pose vs. identity recognition of people and deforming objects. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience. 2014;8:37. doi: 10.3389/fncom.2014.00037 24744725
69. Jarrett K, Kavukcuoglu K, Ranzato M, LeCun Y. What is the best multi-stage architecture for object recognition? IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision. 2009;p. 2146–2153. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=5459469
70. Leibo JZ, Mutch J, Rosasco L, Ullman S, Poggio T. Learning Generic Invariances in Object Recognition: Translation and Scale. MIT-CSAIL-TR-2010-061, CBCL-294. 2010; Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/60378
71. Saxe A, Koh PW, Chen Z, Bhand M, Suresh B, Ng AY. On random weights and unsupervised feature learning. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). 2011; Available from: http://ai.stanford.edu/~ang/papers/nipsdlufl10-RandomWeights.pdf
72. Troje N, Bülthoff HH, Face recognition under varying poses: The role of texture and shape. Vision Research. 1996;36(12):1761–1771. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/0042698995002308 doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(95)00230-8 8759445
73. Tan C, Poggio T. Neural tuning size is a key factor underlying holistic face processing. arXiv preprint arXiv:14063793. 2014;.
74. Singular Inversions. FaceGen Modeller 3. Toronto, ON Canada: Ver. 3; 2003.
75. BlenderDotOrg. Blender 2.6. Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 2013.
76. Vetter T, Hurlbert A, Poggio T, View-based models of 3D object recognition: invariance to imaging transformations. Cerebral Cortex. 1995;5(3):261. Available from: http://cercor.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/3/261.abstract doi: 10.1093/cercor/5.3.261 7613081
77. Leibo JZ, Mutch J, Poggio T. Why The Brain Separates Face Recognition From Object Recognition. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS). Granada, Spain; 2011.
78. DigimationDotCom. Digimation archive;.
79. Bülthoff HH, Edelman S, Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1992;89(1):60. Available from: http://www.pnas.org/content/89/1/60.short doi: 10.1073/pnas.89.1.60
80. Logothetis N, Pauls J, Bülthoff H, Poggio T, View-dependent object recognition by monkeys. Current Biology. 1994;4(5):401–414. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960982200000890 doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(00)00089-0 7922354
81. Logothetis N, Pauls J, Poggio T, Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys. Current Biology. 1995;5(5):552–563. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960982295001084 doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(95)00108-4 7583105
82. Malach R, Reppas JB, Benson RR, Kwong KK, Jiang H, Kennedy WA, et al. Object-related activity revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging in human occipital cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1995;92(18):8135–8139. Available from: http://www.pnas.org/content/92/18/8135.short doi: 10.1073/pnas.92.18.8135
83. Issa EB, DiCarlo JJ, Precedence of the Eye Region in Neural Processing of Faces. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2012;32(47):16666–16682. Available from: http://www.jneurosci.org/content/32/47/16666.short doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2391-12.2012 23175821
84. Heisele B, Serre T, Pontil M, Poggio T. Component-based Face Detection. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). Kauai, Hawaii, USA: IEEE; 2001. p. 659–657.
85. Ullman S, Epshtein B, Visual classification by a hierarchy of extended fragments. In: Toward Category-Level Object Recognition. Springer; 2006. p. 321–344.
86. Young AW, Hellawell D, Hay DC, Configurational information in face perception. Perception. 1987;16(6):747–759. doi: 10.1068/p160747 3454432
87. Ramon y Cajal S, Texture of the Nervous System of Man and the Vertebrates: I. Springer; 1999.
88. Barlow H, Why have multiple cortical areas? Vision Research. 1986;26(1):81–90. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(86)90072-6 doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(86)90072-6 3716216
89. Mitchison G, Neuronal branching patterns and the economy of cortical wiring. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences. 1991;245(1313):151–158. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1991.0102 1682939
90. Chklovskii DB, Koulakov AA, Maps in the brain: What can we learn from them? Annual Review of Neuroscience. 2004;27:369–392. doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144226 15217337
91. Marder E, Neuromodulation of neuronal circuits: back to the future. Neuron. 2012;76(1):1–11. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.09.010 doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.09.010 23040802
92. Dehaene S, Cohen L, Sigman M, Vinckier F, The neural code for written words: a proposal. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2005 Jul;9(7):335–41. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.004 doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.004 15951224
93. Glezer LS, Jiang X, Riesenhuber M, Evidence for highly selective neuronal tuning to whole words in the visual word form area?. Neuron. 2009;62(2):199–204. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.03.017 19409265
94. Epstein R, Kanwisher N, A cortical representation of the local visual environment. Nature. 1998;392(6676):598–601. Available from: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v392/n6676/abs/392598a0.html doi: 10.1038/33402 9560155
95. Kornblith S, Cheng X, Ohayon S, Tsao DY, A Network for Scene Processing in the Macaque Temporal Lobe. Neuron. 2013;79(4):766–781. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.06.015 23891401
96. Epstein RA, Julian JB, Scene Areas in Humans and Macaques. Neuron. 2013;79(4):615–617. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.08.001 doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.08.001 23972591
97. Ko EY, Leibo JZ, Poggio T. A hierarchical model of perspective-invariant scene identification. In: Society for Neuroscience (486.16/OO26). Washington D.C.; 2011. Available from: http://cbcl.mit.edu/publications/ps/sfn_2011_perspect_poster_V1.pdf
98. Epstein RA, Vass LK, Neural systems for landmark-based wayfinding in humans. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2014;369(1635):20120533. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0533
99. Tarr MJ, Bülthoff H, Image-based object recognition in man, monkey and machine. Cognition. 1998;67(1):1–20. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027798000262 doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00026-2 9735534
100. Marr D, Nishihara HK, Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B Biological Sciences. 1978;200(1140):269–294. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1978.0020
101. Biederman I, Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. Psychological review. 1987;94(2):115. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.94.2.115 3575582
102. Ullman S, Aligning pictorial descriptions: An approach to object recognition? 1. Cognition. 1989;32(3):193–254. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/001002778990036X doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(89)90036-X 2752709
103. Poggio T, Edelman S, A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects. Nature. 1990;343(6255):263–266. Available from: http://cbcl.mit.edu/people/poggio-new/journals/poggio-edelman-nature-1990.pdf doi: 10.1038/343263a0 2300170
104. Tarr MJ, Bülthoff HH, Is human object recognition better described by geon structural descriptions or by multiple views? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1995;21(6):1494–1505. 7490590
105. Schyns PG, Diagnostic recognition: task constraints, object information, and their interactions. Cognition. 1998;67(1):147–179. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00016-X 9735539
106. Tarr MJ, Gauthier I, Do viewpoint-dependent mechanisms generalize across members of a class? Cognition. 1998;67(1):73–110. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00023-7 9735537
107. Hill H, Schyns PG, Akamatsu S, Information and viewpoint dependence in face recognition. Cognition. 1997;62(2):201–222. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(96)00785-8 9141907
108. Sinha P, Poggio T, Role of learning in three-dimensional form perception. Nature. 1996;384(6608):460–463. doi: 10.1038/384460a0 8945472
109. Gauthier I, Tarr MJ, Becoming a “greeble” expert: Exploring mechanisms for face recognition. Vision Research. 1997;37(12):1673–1682. Available from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.55.1513&rep=rep1&type=pdf doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(96)00286-6 9231232
110. Dehaene S, Cohen L, Cultural recycling of cortical maps. Neuron. 2007;56(2):384–398. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2007.10.004 17964253
111. Srihasam K, Mandeville JB, Morocz IA, Sullivan KJ, Livingstone MS, Behavioral and anatomical consequences of early versus late symbol training in macaques. Neuron. 2012;73(3):608–619. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.12.022 22325210
112. Zeiler MD, Fergus R. Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Neural Networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:13112901. 2013;.
113. Torgerson WS, Theory and methods of scaling. Wiley; 1958.
114. Nene S, Nayar S, Murase H. Columbia Object Image Library (COIL-100). Columbia University Tech Report No CUCS-006-96. 1996;.