Modelling divided visual attention with a winner-take-all network

Experimental evidence on the distribution of visual attention supports the idea of a spatial saliency map, whereby bottom-up and top-down influences on attention are integrated by a winner-take-all mechanism. We implement this map with a continuous attractor neural network, and test the ability of our model to explain experimental evidence on the distribution of spatial attention. The majority of evidence supports the view that attention is unitary, but recent experiments provide evidence for split attentional foci. We simulate two such experiments. Our results suggest that the ability to divide attention depends on sustained endogenous signals from short term memory to the saliency map, stressing the interplay between working memory mechanisms and attention.

[1]  Sabine Maasen,et al.  Mechanisms of visual attention : a cognitive neuroscience perspective , 1998 .

[2]  S Ullman,et al.  Shifts in selective visual attention: towards the underlying neural circuitry. , 1985, Human neurobiology.

[3]  Noam Sobel,et al.  Attentional modulation in human primary olfactory cortex , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[4]  S. A. Hillyard,et al.  Sustained division of the attentional spotlight , 2003, Nature.

[5]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.

[6]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature binding, attention and object perception. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[7]  R. Klein,et al.  Splitting versus sharing focal attention: comment on Castiello and Umiltà (1992). , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  P. Goldman-Rakic,et al.  Mnemonic coding of visual space in the monkey's dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. , 1989, Journal of neurophysiology.

[9]  G. Deco,et al.  The time course of selective visual attention: theory and experiments , 2002, Vision Research.

[10]  C. Koch,et al.  Computational modelling of visual attention , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[11]  D. LaBerge,et al.  Theory of attentional operations in shape identification. , 1989 .

[12]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  H. Pashler,et al.  Evidence for split attentional foci. , 2000, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

[14]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and the detection of signals. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  D.I. Standage,et al.  A continuous attractor neural network model of divided visual attention , 2005, Proceedings. 2005 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, 2005..

[16]  John K. Tsotsos.  On the relative complexity of active vs. passive visual search , 2004, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[17]  M. Goldberg,et al.  Space and attention in parietal cortex. , 1999, Annual review of neuroscience.

[18]  N. Cowan.  The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[19]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[20]  Arthur F. Kramer,et al.  Further Evidence for the Division of Attention Among Non-contiguous Locations , 1998 .

[21]  Thomas P. Trappenberg,et al.  Multi-packet regions in stabilized continuous attractor networks , 2005, Neurocomputing.

[22]  Peter E. Latham,et al.  Divisive Normalization, Line Attractor Networks and Ideal Observers , 1998, NIPS.

[23]  S. Shipp.  The brain circuitry of attention , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.