Learning the invariance properties of complex cells from their responses to natural stimuli

Neurons in primary visual cortex are typically classified as either simple or complex. Whereas simple cells respond strongly to grating and bar stimuli displayed at a certain phase and visual field location, complex cell responses are insensitive to small translations of the stimulus within the receptive field [ Hubel & Wiesel (1962)J. Physiol. (Lond.), 160, 106–154; Kjaer et al. (1997)J. Neurophysiol., 78, 3187–3197]. This constancy in the response to variations of the stimuli is commonly called invariance. Hubel and Wiesel's classical model of the primary visual cortex proposes a connectivity scheme which successfully describes simple and complex cell response properties. However, the question as to how this connectivity arises during normal development is left open. Based on their work and inspired by recent physiological findings we suggest a network model capable of learning from natural stimuli and developing receptive field properties which match those of cortical simple and complex cells. Stimuli are drawn from videos obtained by a camera mounted to a cat's head, so they should approximate the natural input to the cat's visual system. The network uses a competitive scheme to learn simple and complex cell response properties. Employing delayed signals to learn connections between simple and complex cells enables the model to utilize temporal properties of the input. We show that the temporal structure of the input gives rise to the emergence and refinement of complex cell receptive fields, whereas removing temporal continuity prevents this processes. This model lends a physiologically based explanation of the development of complex cell invariance response properties.

[1]  D. Hubel,et al.  Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex , 1962, The Journal of physiology.

[2]  J. Stone,et al.  Conduction velocity of afferents to cat visual cortex: a correlation with cortical receptive field properties. , 1971, Brain research.

[3]  J. Movshon The velocity tuning of single units in cat striate cortex. , 1975, The Journal of physiology.

[4]  S. Sherman,et al.  Receptive-field characteristics of neurons in cat striate cortex: Changes with visual field eccentricity. , 1976, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  K. Tanaka,et al.  Organization of cat visual cortex as investigated by cross-correlation technique. , 1981, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  D. Ferster,et al.  An intracellular analysis of geniculo‐cortical connectivity in area 17 of the cat. , 1983, The Journal of physiology.

[7]  R. Douglas,et al.  Eye-head coordination in cats. , 1984, Journal of neurophysiology.

[8]  J. Malpeli,et al.  Cat area 17. I. Pattern of thalamic control of cortical layers. , 1986, Journal of neurophysiology.

[9]  J. Lisman,et al.  A mechanism for the Hebb and the anti-Hebb processes underlying learning and memory. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  W. Singer,et al.  Different voltage-dependent thresholds for inducing long-term depression and long-term potentiation in slices of rat visual cortex , 1990, Nature.

[11]  R. Douglas,et al.  A functional microcircuit for cat visual cortex. , 1991, The Journal of physiology.

[12]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  Competitive Anti-Hebbian Learning of Invariants , 1991, NIPS.

[13]  Peter Földiák,et al.  Learning Invariance from Transformation Sequences , 1991, Neural Comput..

[14]  Anders Krogh,et al.  Introduction to the theory of neural computation , 1994, The advanced book program.

[15]  X. D. Yang,et al.  Initial synaptic efficacy influences induction and expression of long-term changes in transmission. , 1991, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Bernd Jähne,et al.  Digital Image Processing: Concepts, Algorithms, and Scientific Applications , 1991 .

[17]  J. Lisman The CaM kinase II hypothesis for the storage of synaptic memory , 1994, Trends in Neurosciences.

[18]  M. Bear,et al.  Synaptic plasticity: LTP and LTD , 1994, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[19]  E T Rolls,et al.  Sparseness of the neuronal representation of stimuli in the primate temporal visual cortex. , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[20]  D. Debanne,et al.  Cooperative interactions in the induction of long-term potentiation and depression of synaptic excitation between hippocampal CA3-CA1 cell pairs in vitro. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  Suzanna Becker,et al.  Mutual information maximization: models of cortical self-organization. , 1996, Network.

[22]  David J. Field,et al.  Emergence of simple-cell receptive field properties by learning a sparse code for natural images , 1996, Nature.

[23]  R. Reid,et al.  The processing and encoding of information in the visual cortex , 1996, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[24]  David J. Field,et al.  Sparse coding with an overcomplete basis set: A strategy employed by V1? , 1997, Vision Research.

[25]  Bartlett W. Mel SEEMORE: Combining Color, Shape, and Texture Histogramming in a Neurally Inspired Approach to Visual Object Recognition , 1997, Neural Computation.

[26]  R. Shapley,et al.  New perspectives on the mechanisms for orientation selectivity , 1997, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[27]  J. Hertz,et al.  Insensitivity of V1 complex cell responses to small shifts in the retinal image of complex patterns. , 1997, Journal of neurophysiology.

[28]  H. Markram,et al.  Regulation of Synaptic Efficacy by Coincidence of Postsynaptic APs and EPSPs , 1997, Science.

[29]  E. Rolls,et al.  INVARIANT FACE AND OBJECT RECOGNITION IN THE VISUAL SYSTEM , 1997, Progress in Neurobiology.

[30]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  The “independent components” of natural scenes are edge filters , 1997, Vision Research.

[31]  J. H. Hateren,et al.  Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998 .

[32]  J. Alonso,et al.  Functional connectivity between simple cells and complex cells in cat striate cortex , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[33]  Bartlett W. Mel,et al.  Translation-Invariant Orientation Tuning in Visual “Complex” Cells Could Derive from Intradendritic Computations , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  G. Bi,et al.  Synaptic Modifications in Cultured Hippocampal Neurons: Dependence on Spike Timing, Synaptic Strength, and Postsynaptic Cell Type , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[35]  B. Sakmann,et al.  A new cellular mechanism for coupling inputs arriving at different cortical layers , 1999, Nature.

[36]  O. Paulsen,et al.  Rapid report: postsynaptic bursting is essential for 'Hebbian' induction of associative long-term potentiation at excitatory synapses in rat hippocampus. , 1999, The Journal of physiology.

[37]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  Survey on Independent Component Analysis , 1999 .

[38]  Suzanna Becker,et al.  Implicit Learning in 3D Object Recognition: The Importance of Temporal Context , 1999, Neural Computation.

[39]  T. Poggio,et al.  Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[40]  Frances S. Chance,et al.  Complex cells as cortically amplified simple cells , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[41]  B. Sakmann,et al.  Calcium electrogenesis in distal apical dendrites of layer 5 pyramidal cells at a critical frequency of back-propagating action potentials. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  Konrad P. Körding,et al.  A learning rule for dynamic recruitment and decorrelation , 2000, Neural Networks.

[43]  J L Gallant,et al.  Sparse coding and decorrelation in primary visual cortex during natural vision. , 2000, Science.

[44]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Learning with two sites of synaptic integration , 2000, Network.

[45]  A. Artola,et al.  Synaptic Activity Modulates the Induction of Bidirectional Synaptic Changes in Adult Mouse Hippocampus , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[46]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  Emergence of Phase- and Shift-Invariant Features by Decomposition of Natural Images into Independent Feature Subspaces , 2000, Neural Computation.

[47]  Konrad P. Körding,et al.  Extracting Slow Subspaces from Natural Videos Leads to Complex Cells , 2001, ICANN.

[48]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Natural signal statistics and sensory gain control , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[49]  BsnNr C. Srorn,et al.  CLASSIFYING SIMPLE AND COMPLEX CELLS ON THE BASIS OF RESPONSE MODULATION , 2002 .

[50]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  Slow Feature Analysis: Unsupervised Learning of Invariances , 2002, Neural Computation.

[51]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Pattern formation, contrast control, and oscillations in the short term memory of shunting on-center off-surround networks , 1975, Biological Cybernetics.

[52]  Kunihiko Fukushima,et al.  Neocognitron: A self-organizing neural network model for a mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position , 1980, Biological Cybernetics.

[53]  RussLL L. Ds Vnlos,et al.  SPATIAL FREQUENCY SELECTIVITY OF CELLS IN MACAQUE VISUAL CORTEX , 2022 .