CBF: A new framework for object categorization in cortex

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 1811, Issue , 2000, Pages 1-10

  Riesenhuber, Maximilian ^a   Poggio, Tomaso ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER VISION; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS;

3D MORPHING; BASIS FUNCTIONS; HIERARCHICAL MODEL; OBJECT CATEGORIZATION;

OBJECT RECOGNITION;

EID: 84958533507     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45482-9_1     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components : A theory of human image understanding. Psych. Rev. 94, 115–147.
2. Bülthoff, H. and Edelman, S. (1992). Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 89, 60–64.
3. Edelman, S. (1999). Representation and Recognition in Vision. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
4. Freedman, D., Riesenhuber, M., Shelton, C., Poggio, T., and Miller, E. (1999). Categorical representation of visual stimuli in the monkey prefrontal (PF) cortex. In Soc. Neurosci. Abs., volume 29, 884.
5. Gauthier, I., Anderson, A., Tarr, M., Skudlarski, P., and Gore, J. (1997). Levels of categorization in visual recognition studied with functional mri. Curr. Biol. 7, 645–651.
6. Intrator, N. and Edelman, S. (1997). Learning low-dimensional representations via the usage of multiple-class labels. Network 8, 259–281.
7. Logothetis, N., Pauls, J., and Poggio, T. (1995). Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys. Curr. Biol. 5, 552–563.
8. Marr, D. (1982). Vision: a computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. Freeman, San Francisco, CA.
9. Papageorgiou, C., Oren, M., and Poggio, T. (1998). A general framework for object detection. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision, Bombay, India, 555–562. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA.
10. Perrett, D., Oram, M., Harries, M., Bevan, R., Hietanen, J., Benson, P., and Thomas, S. (1991). Viewer-centred and object-centred coding of heads in the macaque temporal cortex. Exp. Brain Res. 86, 159–173.
11. Poggio, T. and Edelman, S. (1990). A network that learns to recognize 3D objects. Nature 343, 263–266.
12. Quinn, P., Eimas, P., and Rosenkrantz, S. (1993). Evidence for representations of perceptually similar natural categories by 3-month-old and 4- month-old infants. Perception 22, 463–475.
13. Riesenhuber, M. and Poggio, T. (1999). Are cortical models really bound by the “Binding Problem”? Neuron 24, 87–93.
14. Riesenhuber, M. and Poggio, T. (1999). Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neurosci. 2, 1019–1025.
15. Riesenhuber, M. and Poggio, T. (1999). A note on object class representation and categorical perception. Technical Report AI Memo 1679, CBCL Paper 183, MIT AI Lab and CBCL, Cambridge, MA.
16. Rosch, E. (1973). Natural categories. Cognit. Psych. 4, 328–350.
17. Shelton, C. (1996). Three-dimensional correspondence. Master’s thesis, MIT, (1996).
18. Tarr, M. (1995). Rotating objects to recognize them: Acase study on the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects. Psychonom. Bull. & Rev. 2, 55–82.
19. Tarr, M. and Gauthier, I. (1998). Do viewpoint-dependent mechanisms generalize across members of a class? Cognition 67, 73–110.