Event-related potential component associated with the recognition of three-dimensional objects

To understand the physiological process underlying view-invariant object recognition, we designed a delayed matching-to-sample task under two different conditions: in the first condition, the sample and test stimuli were presented in the same view, and in the second, the two stimuli were presented in different views. The event-related potential (ERP) component, posterior N1, exhibited a significantly larger amplitude when the test image was in the same view as the sample image than when the test and the sample images were in different views. The result indicates that the posterior N1 is significantly sensitive to view association, and clarifies the difference between the neuronal activity that occurs in 3D object recognition and 2D image identification at the level of N1.

[1]  Tomaso Poggio,et al.  Models of object recognition , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[2]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys , 1995, Current Biology.

[3]  I. Biederman.  Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[4]  M. Corballis.  Recognition of disoriented shapes. , 1988, Psychological review.

[5]  Ravi S. Menon,et al.  Differential Effects of Viewpoint on Object-Driven Activation in Dorsal and Ventral Streams , 2002, Neuron.

[6]  T. Allison,et al.  Electrophysiological Studies of Face Perception in Humans , 1996, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[7]  K. Grill-Spector,et al.  The human visual cortex. , 2004, Annual review of neuroscience.

[8]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Inferotemporal cortex and object vision. , 1996, Annual review of neuroscience.

[9]  E. Rolls,et al.  View-invariant representations of familiar objects by neurons in the inferior temporal visual cortex. , 1998, Cerebral cortex.

[10]  Bruno A Olshausen,et al.  Timecourse of neural signatures of object recognition. , 2003, Journal of vision.

[11]  I. Biederman,et al.  Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition. , 1992, Psychological review.

[12]  M. Tarr,et al.  The N170 occipito‐temporal component is delayed and enhanced to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: an electrophysiological account of face‐specific processes in the human brain , 2000, Neuroreport.

[13]  D. Marr,et al.  Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes , 1978, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[14]  R. Henson,et al.  Multiple levels of visual object constancy revealed by event-related fMRI of repetition priming , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[15]  M. Kiefer,et al.  Cognitive Neuroscience: Tracking the time course of object categorization using event-related potentials , 1999 .

[16]  E. Vogel,et al.  The visual N1 component as an index of a discrimination process. , 2000, Psychophysiology.

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

[18]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Functional architecture in monkey inferotemporal cortex revealed by in vivo optical imaging , 1998, Neuroscience Research.

[19]  M. Tarr.  Rotating objects to recognize them: A case study on the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[20]  N. Logothetis,et al.  View-dependent object recognition by monkeys , 1994, Current Biology.

[21]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Optical Imaging of Functional Organization in the Monkey Inferotemporal Cortex , 1996, Science.