Key Visual Features for Rapid Categorization of Animals in Natural Scenes

In speeded categorization tasks, decisions could be based on diagnostic target features or they may need the activation of complete representations of the object. Depending on task requirements, the priming of feature detectors through top–down expectation might lower the threshold of selective units or speed up the rate of information accumulation. In the present paper, 40 subjects performed a rapid go/no-go animal/non-animal categorization task with 400 briefly flashed natural scenes to study how performance depends on physical scene characteristics, target configuration, and the presence or absence of diagnostic animal features. Performance was evaluated both in terms of accuracy and speed and d′ curves were plotted as a function of reaction time (RT). Such d′ curves give an estimation of the processing dynamics for studied features and characteristics over the entire subject population. Global image characteristics such as color and brightness do not critically influence categorization speed, although they slightly influence accuracy. Global critical factors include the presence of a canonical animal posture and animal/background size ratio suggesting the role of coarse global form. Performance was best for both accuracy and speed, when the animal was in a typical posture and when it occupied about 20–30% of the image. The presence of diagnostic animal features was another critical factor. Performance was significantly impaired both in accuracy (drop 3.3–7.5%) and speed (median RT increase 7–16 ms) when diagnostic animal parts (eyes, mouth, and limbs) were missing. Such animal features were shown to influence performance very early when only 15–25% of the response had been produced. In agreement with other experimental and modeling studies, our results support fast diagnostic recognition of animals based on key intermediate features and priming based on the subject's expertise.

[1]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[2]  James H Elder,et al.  Cue dynamics underlying rapid detection of animals in natural scenes. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[3]  Wolfgang Einhäuser,et al.  Color aids late but not early stages of rapid natural scene recognition. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[4]  Timothée Masquelier,et al.  Unsupervised Learning of Visual Features through Spike Timing Dependent Plasticity , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[5]  S. Ullman Object recognition and segmentation by a fragment-based hierarchy , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  A. Torralba,et al.  The role of context in object recognition , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[7]  Keiji Tanaka Columns for complex visual object features in the inferotemporal cortex: clustering of cells with similar but slightly different stimulus selectivities. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.

[8]  S. Thorpe,et al.  Seeking Categories in the Brain , 2001, Science.

[9]  K. Gegenfurtner,et al.  The contributions of color to recognition memory for natural scenes. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[10]  Thomas Serre,et al.  A feedforward architecture accounts for rapid categorization , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  S. Thorpe,et al.  The time course of visual processing: Backward masking and natural scene categorisation , 2005, Vision Research.

[12]  S. Mineka,et al.  Selective associations in the observational conditioning of fear in rhesus monkeys. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[13]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection theory: A user's guide, 2nd ed. , 2005 .

[14]  Michel Vidal-Naquet,et al.  Visual features of intermediate complexity and their use in classification , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[15]  J. Rieger,et al.  Sensory and cognitive contributions of color to the recognition of natural scenes , 2000, Current Biology.

[16]  Krista A. Ehinger,et al.  The role of color in visual search in real-world scenes: Evidence from contextual cuing , 2008, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  Olivier R. Joubert,et al.  The Time-Course of Visual Categorizations: You Spot the Animal Faster than the Bird , 2009, PloS one.

[18]  S. Thorpe,et al.  The Time Course of Visual Processing: From Early Perception to Decision-Making , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  G Richard,et al.  Ultra-rapid categorisation of natural scenes does not rely on colour cues: a study in monkeys and humans , 2000, Vision Research.

[20]  Jude F. Mitchell,et al.  Object-based attention determines dominance in binocular rivalry , 2004, Nature.

[21]  P. Perona,et al.  Why does natural scene categorization require little attention? Exploring attentional requirements for natural and synthetic stimuli , 2005 .

[22]  R. Vogels Categorization of complex visual images by rhesus monkeys. Part 1: behavioural study , 1999, The European journal of neuroscience.

[23]  E. Ziegel Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing (2nd ed.) , 2005 .

[24]  Philippe G Schyns,et al.  Diagnostic recognition: task constraints, object information, and their interactions , 1998, Cognition.

[25]  Guillaume A. Rousselet,et al.  Processing of one, two or four natural scenes in humans: the limits of parallelism , 2004, Vision Research.

[26]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[27]  G. Rousselet,et al.  Is it an animal? Is it a human face? Fast processing in upright and inverted natural scenes. , 2003, Journal of vision.

[28]  S. Thorpe,et al.  Surfing a spike wave down the ventral stream , 2002, Vision Research.

[29]  S. Thorpe,et al.  How parallel is visual processing in the ventral pathway? , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[30]  R. Desimone,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Visual Working Memory in Prefrontal Cortex of the Macaque , 1996, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[31]  Guillaume A. Rousselet,et al.  Processing scene context: Fast categorization and object interference , 2007, Vision Research.

[32]  R. Wilcox Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing , 1997 .

[33]  S. Thorpe,et al.  A Limit to the Speed of Processing in Ultra-Rapid Visual Categorization of Novel Natural Scenes , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[34]  廣瀬雄一,et al.  Neuroscience , 2019, Workplace Attachments.

[35]  L. Cosmides,et al.  Category-specific attention for animals reflects ancestral priorities, not expertise , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  Paul T. Sowden,et al.  Channel surfing in the visual brain , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[37]  E. Cooper,et al.  Differences in the coding of spatial relations in face identification and basic-level object recognition. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[38]  S. Thorpe,et al.  Rapid categorization of achromatic natural scenes: how robust at very low contrasts? , 2005, The European journal of neuroscience.

[39]  Michèle Fabre-Thorpe,et al.  Spotting animals in natural scenes: efficiency of humans and monkeys at very low contrasts , 2010, Animal Cognition.

[40]  A. Treisman,et al.  Perception of objects in natural scenes: is it really attention free? , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[41]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Response Times: Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization , 1986 .

[42]  L. Chelazzi,et al.  Neurons in Area V4 of the Macaque Translate Attended Visual Features into Behaviorally Relevant Categories , 2007, Neuron.

[43]  M. Chun,et al.  Selective attention modulates implicit learning , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[44]  D. B. Bender,et al.  Visual properties of neurons in inferotemporal cortex of the Macaque. , 1972, Journal of neurophysiology.

[45]  Jodi L. Davenport Consistency effects between objects in scenes , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[46]  John M Henderson,et al.  The time course of initial scene processing for eye movement guidance in natural scene search. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[47]  Denis Fize,et al.  Speed of processing in the human visual system , 1996, Nature.

[48]  D. Perrett,et al.  Recognition of objects and their component parts: responses of single units in the temporal cortex of the macaque. , 1994, Cerebral cortex.

[49]  D. Perrett,et al.  Visual neurones responsive to faces in the monkey temporal cortex , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[50]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  Face identification using one spike per neuron: resistance to image degradations , 2001, Neural Networks.

[51]  M. Bar Visual objects in context , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[52]  H. Wässle,et al.  Response latency of brisk‐sustained (X) and brisk‐transient (Y) cells in the cat retina , 1982, The Journal of physiology.

[53]  Robert Desimone,et al.  Parallel and Serial Neural Mechanisms for Visual Search in Macaque Area V4 , 2005, Science.

[54]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Detection of animals in natural images using far peripheral vision , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[55]  R. Desimone,et al.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.

[56]  N. Sigala,et al.  Visual Categorization and Object Representation in Monkeys and Humans , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[57]  Guillaume A. Rousselet,et al.  Early interference of context congruence on object processing in rapid visual categorization of natural scenes. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[58]  C. B. Cave,et al.  The Role of Parts and Spatial Relations in Object Identification , 1993, Perception.

[59]  James McGilvray,et al.  To color , 2004, Synthese.

[60]  V. Bruce,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology When Inverted Faces Are Recognized: the Role of Configural Information in Face Recognition , 2022 .

[61]  N. Sigala,et al.  Visual categorization shapes feature selectivity in the primate temporal cortex , 2002, Nature.