Neuronal adaptation for sampling-based probabilistic inference in perceptual bistability

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 24: 25th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2011, NIPS 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages

  Reichert, David P ^a   Seriès, Peggy ^a   Storkey, Amos J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BINOCULAR VISION; LEARNING SYSTEMS; NEURAL NETWORKS; NEURONS;

BI-STABILITY; CORTICAL PROCESSING; DEEP BOLTZMANN MACHINES; LEVEL MECHANISM; MACHINE MODELLING; MULTISTABILITY; PERCEPTUAL MULTISTABILITY; PROBABILISTIC INFERENCE; SAMPLING-BASED; SENSORY INPUT;

BRAIN;

EID: 85162355098     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. Leopold and Logothetis (1999) Multistable phenomena: changing views in perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 254-264, PMID: 10377540.
2. Dayan, P. (1998) A hierarchical model of binocular rivalry. Neural Computation, 10, 1119-1135.
3. van Ee, R., Adams, W. J., and Mamassian, P. (2003) Bayesian modeling of cue interaction: bistability in stereoscopic slant perception. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 20, 1398-1406.
4. Sundareswara, R. and Schrater, P. R. (2008) Perceptual multistability predicted by search model for Bayesian decisions. Journal of Vision, 8, 1-19.
5. Hohwy, J., Roepstorff, A., and Friston, K. (2008) Predictive coding explains binocular rivalry: An epistemological review. Cognition, 108, 687-701.
6. Gershman, S., Vul, E., and Tenenbaum, J. (2009) Perceptual multistability as markov chain monte carlo inference. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 22.
7. Blake, R. (1989) A neural theory of binocular rivalry. Psychological Review, 96, 145-167, PMID: 2648445.
8. Grossberg, S. and Swaminathan, G. (2004) A laminar cortical model for 3D perception of slanted and curved surfaces and of 2D images: development, attention, and bistability. Vision Research, 44, 1147-1187.
9. Fiser, J., Berkes, B., Orban, G., and Lengyel, M. (2010) Statistically optimal perception and learning: from behavior to neural representations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 119-130.
10. Vul, E., Goodman, N. D., Griffiths, T. L., and Tenenbaum, J. B. (2009) One and done? optimal decisions from very few samples. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
11. Reichert, D. P., Seriès, P., and Storkey, A. J. (2010) Hallucinations in Charles Bonnet Syndrome induced by homeostasis: a Deep Boltzmann Machine model. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 23, 23, 2020-2028.
12. Reichert, D. P., Seriès, P., and Storkey, A. J. (2011) A hierarchical generative model of recurrent Object-Based attention in the visual cortex. Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks (ICANN-11).
13. Breuleux, O., Bengio, Y., and Vincent, P. (2011) Quickly generating representative samples from an RBM-Derived process. Neural Computation, pp. 1-16.
14. Welling, M. (2009) Herding dynamical weights to learn. Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Machine Learning, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, pp. 1121-1128, ACM.
15. Salakhutdinov, R. and Hinton, G. (2009) Deep Boltzmann machines. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS), vol. 5, pp. 448-455.
16. Tieleman, T. and Hinton, G. (2009) Using fast weights to improve persistent contrastive divergence. Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Machine Learning, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, pp. 1033-1040, ACM.
17. Maass, W. and Zador, A. M. (1999) Dynamic stochastic synapses as computational units. Neural Computation, 11, 903-917.
18. Turrigiano, G. G. (2008) The self-tuning neuron: synaptic scaling of excitatory synapses. Cell, 135, 422-435, PMID: 18984155.
19. Zhou, Y. H., Gao, J. B., White, K. D., Yao, K., and Merk, I. (2004) Perceptual dominance time distributions in multistable visual perception. Biological Cybernetics, 90, 256-263.
20. Meng, M. and Tong, F. (2004) Can attention selectively bias bistable perception? differences between binocular rivalry and ambiguous figures. Journal of Vision, 4.
21. Toppino, T. C. (2003) Reversible-figure perception: mechanisms of intentional control. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 1285-1295, PMID: 14710962.
22. Peterson, M. A. and Gibson, B. S. (1991) Directing spatial attention within an object: Altering the functional equivalence of shape descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 170-182.
23. van Ee, R., Noest, A. J., Brascamp, J. W., and van den Berg, A. V. (2006) Attentional control over either of the two competing percepts of ambiguous stimuli revealed by a two-parameter analysis: means do not make the difference. Vision Research, 46, 3129-3141, PMID: 16650452.
24. Tong, F., Meng, M., and Blake, R. (2006) Neural bases of binocular rivalry. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 502-511.
25. Knapen, T., Kanai, R., Brascamp, J., van Boxtel, J., and van Ee, R. (2007) Distance in feature space determines exclusivity in visual rivalry. Vision Research, 47, 3269-3275, PMID: 17950397.
26. Kang, M. and Blake, R. (2010) What causes alternations in dominance during binocular rivalry? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 179-186.