Learning Spatial Invariance with the Trace Rule in Nonuniform Distributions

Convolutional models of object recognition achieve invariance to spatial transformations largely because of the use of a suitably defined pooling operator. This operator typically takes the form of a max or average function defined across units tuned to the same feature. As a model of the brain's ventral pathway, where computations are carried out by weighted synaptic connections, such pooling can lead to spatial invariance only if the weights that connect similarly tuned units to a given pooling unit are of approximately equal strengths. How identical weights can be learned in the face of nonuniformly distributed data remains unclear. In this letter, we show how various versions of the trace learning rule can help solve this problem. This allows us in turn to explain previously published results and make recommendations as to the optimal rule for invariance learning.

[1]  Leon N. Cooper ... et al. Theory of cortical plasticity , 2014 .

[2]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition , 1998, Proc. IEEE.

[3]  Edmund T. Rolls,et al.  Invariant visual object recognition: A model, with lighting invariance , 2006, Journal of Physiology-Paris.

[4]  Laurenz Wiskott,et al.  Slowness: An Objective for Spike-Timing–Dependent Plasticity? , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[5]  E T Rolls,et al.  Invariant object recognition in the visual system with error correction and temporal difference learning , 2001, Network.

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

[7]  Marc'Aurelio Ranzato,et al.  Unsupervised Learning of Invariant Feature Hierarchies with Applications to Object Recognition , 2007, 2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[8]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  Broken Symmetries in a Location-Invariant Word Recognition Network , 2011, Neural Computation.

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

[10]  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.

[11]  Andreas Maurer,et al.  Unsupervised slow subspace-learning from stationary processes , 2006, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[12]  Thomas Serre,et al.  Learning complex cell invariance from natural videos: A plausibility proof , 2007 .

[13]  A G Barto,et al.  Toward a modern theory of adaptive networks: expectation and prediction. , 1981, Psychological review.

[14]  Nathan Intrator,et al.  Theory of Cortical Plasticity , 2004 .

[15]  S. Smale,et al.  On a model of visual cortex: learning invariance and selectivity , 2008 .

[16]  Chris J. S. Webber Self-Organization of Symmetry Networks: Transformation Invariance from the Spontaneous Symmetry-Breaking Mechanism , 2000, Neural Computation.

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

[18]  Konrad P. Körding,et al.  The world from a cat’s perspective – statistics of natural videos , 2003, Biological Cybernetics.

[19]  John Shawe-Taylor,et al.  Symmetries and discriminability in feedforward network architectures , 1993, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[20]  T. Poggio,et al.  A model of V4 shape selectivity and invariance. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[21]  Elke Zobl,et al.  From , 2020, The Solace Is Not the Lullaby.

[22]  Martin A. Giese,et al.  Biophysiologically Plausible Implementations of the Maximum Operation , 2002, Neural Computation.

[23]  E. Oja Simplified neuron model as a principal component analyzer , 1982, Journal of mathematical biology.

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

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

[26]  Jean Ponce,et al.  A Theoretical Analysis of Feature Pooling in Visual Recognition , 2010, ICML.

[27]  Tomaso A. Poggio,et al.  Biophysical Models of Neural Computation: Max and Tuning Circuits , 2006, WImBI.

[28]  Nicolas Pinto,et al.  Why is Real-World Visual Object Recognition Hard? , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[29]  Nathan Intrator,et al.  Theory of Cortical Plasticity: (With Software Package “PLASTICITY”) , 2004 .