Simple-Cell-Like Receptive Fields Maximize Temporal Coherence in Natural Video

Recently, statistical models of natural images have shown the emergence of several properties of the visual cortex. Most models have considered the nongaussian properties of static image patches, leading to sparse coding or independent component analysis. Here we consider the basic time dependencies of image sequences instead of their nongaussianity. We show that simple-cell-type receptive fields emerge when temporal response strength correlation is maximized for natural image sequences. Thus, temporal response strength correlation, which is a nonlinear measure of temporal coherence, provides an alternative to sparseness in modeling simple-cell receptive field properties. Our results also suggest an interpretation of simple cells in terms of invariant coding principles, which have previously been used to explain complex-cell receptive fields.

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

[2]  A. Hyvärinen,et al.  A multi-layer sparse coding network learns contour coding from natural images , 2002, Vision Research.

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

[4]  A. Hyvärinen,et al.  Temporal and spatiotemporal coherence in simple-cell responses: a generative model of natural image sequences , 2003 .

[5]  W. Hashimoto.  Quadratic forms in natural images. , 2003 .

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

[7]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  Spatiotemporal receptive fields maximizing temporal coherence in natural image sequences , 2004, Neurocomputing.

[8]  Graeme Mitchison,et al.  Removing Time Variation with the Anti-Hebbian Differential Synapse , 1991, Neural Computation.

[9]  D. Luenberger.  Optimization by Vector Space Methods , 1968 .

[10]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  A unifying framework for natural image statistics: spatiotemporal activity bubbles , 2004, Neurocomputing.

[11]  Suzanna Becker,et al.  Learning to Categorize Objects Using Temporal Coherence , 1992, NIPS.

[12]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  Bubbles: a unifying framework for low-level statistical properties of natural image sequences. , 2003, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[13]  Jarmo Hurri,et al.  Independent Component Analysis of Image Data , 1997 .

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

[15]  D. Heeger.  Normalization of cell responses in cat striate cortex , 1992, Visual Neuroscience.

[16]  A. Hoffman,et al.  Some metric inequalities in the space of matrices , 1955 .

[17]  D. Ringach.  Mapping receptive fields in primary visual cortex , 2004, The Journal of physiology.

[18]  D. Ruderman,et al.  Independent component analysis of natural image sequences yields spatio-temporal filters similar to simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[19]  D. Ruderman,et al.  Independent component analysis of natural image sequences yields spatio-temporal filters similar to simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[20]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Natural image statistics and neural representation. , 2001, Annual review of neuroscience.

[21]  I. Ohzawa,et al.  Spatiotemporal organization of simple-cell receptive fields in the cat's striate cortex. II. Linearity of temporal and spatial summation. , 1993, Journal of neurophysiology.

[22]  David J. Field,et al.  What Is the Goal of Sensory Coding? , 1994, Neural Computation.

[23]  J. Movshon,et al.  Linearity and Normalization in Simple Cells of the Macaque Primary Visual Cortex , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  James V. Stone.  Learning Perceptually Salient Visual Parameters Using Spatiotemporal Smoothness Constraints , 1996, Neural Computation.

[25]  J. Atick,et al.  Temporal decorrelation: a theory of lagged and nonlagged responses in the lateral geniculate nucleus , 1995 .

[26]  I. Ohzawa,et al.  Spatiotemporal organization of simple-cell receptive fields in the cat's striate cortex. I. General characteristics and postnatal development. , 1993, Journal of neurophysiology.

[27]  Samuel Kaski,et al.  Self-Organized Formation of Various Invariant-Feature Filters in the Adaptive-Subspace SOM , 1997, Neural Computation.

[28]  Alan V. Oppenheim,et al.  Digital Signal Processing , 1978, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

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

[30]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Self-organizing neural network that discovers surfaces in random-dot stereograms , 1992, Nature.

[31]  H. Barlow.  Vision Science: Photons to Phenomenology by Stephen E. Palmer , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[32]  J. V. van Hateren,et al.  Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[33]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  A two-layer sparse coding model learns simple and complex cell receptive fields and topography from natural images , 2001, Vision Research.

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

[35]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  Blind separation of sources that have spatiotemporal variance dependencies , 2004, Signal Process..