Encoding of Complexity, Shape, and Curvature by Macaque Infero-Temporal Neurons

We recorded responses of macaque infero-temporal (IT) neurons to a stimulus set of Fourier boundary descriptor shapes wherein complexity, general shape, and curvature were systematically varied. We analyzed the response patterns of the neurons to the different stimuli using multidimensional scaling. The resulting neural shape space differed in important ways from the physical, image-based shape space. We found a particular sensitivity for the presence of curved versus straight contours that existed only for the simple but not for the medium and highly complex shapes. Also, IT neurons could linearly separate the simple and the complex shapes within a low-dimensional neural shape space, but no distinction was found between the medium and high levels of complexity. None of these effects could be derived from physical image metrics, either directly or by comparing the neural data with similarities yielded by two models of low-level visual processing (one using wavelet-based filters and one that models position and size invariant object selectivity through four hierarchically organized neural layers). This study highlights the relevance of complexity to IT neural encoding, both as a neurally independently represented shape property and through its influence on curvature detection.

[1]  R. Vogels Categorization of complex visual images by rhesus monkeys. Part 1: behavioural study , 1999, The European journal of neuroscience.

[2]  L. Gool,et al.  Minimal information to determine affine shape equivalence. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  Mark W. Pettet PII: S0042-6989(98)00130-8 , 1998 .

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

[5]  Gunter Loffler,et al.  Perception of contours and shapes: Low and intermediate stage mechanisms , 2008, Vision Research.

[6]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  The effect of category learning on the representation of shape: dimensions can be biased but not differentiated. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[7]  J. Hochberg,et al.  A quantitative approach to figural "goodness". , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[9]  David G. Lowe,et al.  The viewpoint consistency constraint , 2015, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[10]  Keiji Tanaka Columns for complex visual object features in the inferotemporal cortex: clustering of cells with similar but slightly different stimulus selectivities. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.

[11]  D. B. Bender,et al.  Visual properties of neurons in inferotemporal cortex of the Macaque. , 1972, Journal of neurophysiology.

[12]  R. Vogels,et al.  Properties of shape tuning of macaque inferior temporal neurons examined using rapid serial visual presentation. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  R. Vogels,et al.  Effects of Category Learning on the Stimulus Selectivity of Macaque References , 2022 .

[14]  P. Schiller,et al.  Quantitative studies of single-cell properties in monkey striate cortex. I. Spatiotemporal organization of receptive fields. , 1976, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  M. Bar,et al.  Humans Prefer Curved Visual Objects , 2006, Psychological science.

[16]  Suzanne P. McKee,et al.  Constraints on long range interactions mediating contour detection , 1998, Vision Research.

[17]  J Wagemans,et al.  Perceptual use of nonaccidental properties. , 1992, Canadian journal of psychology.

[18]  R. Vogels Categorization of complex visual images by rhesus monkeys. Part 2: single‐cell study , 1999, The European journal of neuroscience.

[19]  Patrick Dupont,et al.  Human Brain Regions Involved in Visual Categorization , 2002, NeuroImage.

[20]  Irving Biederman,et al.  One-shot viewpoint invariance in matching novel objects , 1999, Vision Research.

[21]  D. Field,et al.  The role of “contrast enhancement” in the detection and appearance of visual contours , 1998, Vision Research.

[22]  I. Biederman,et al.  Inferior Temporal Neurons Show Greater Sensitivity to Nonaccidental than to Metric Shape Differences , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[23]  S F Chipman,et al.  Complexity and structure in visual patterns. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[24]  R. Desimone,et al.  Shape recognition and inferior temporal neurons. , 1983, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  J. M. Vanderplas,et al.  Complexity, association value, and practice as factors in shape recognition following paired associates training. , 1959, Journal of experimental psychology.

[26]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Delayed shape matching benefits from simplicity and symmetry , 2009, Vision Research.

[27]  Charles E Connor,et al.  Underlying principles of visual shape selectivity in posterior inferotemporal cortex , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[28]  Peter Medawar Transformation of shape , 1950, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B - Biological Sciences.

[29]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  The influence of orientation jitter and motion on contour saliency and object identification , 2009, Vision Research.

[30]  N. Sigala,et al.  Visual categorization shapes feature selectivity in the primate temporal cortex , 2002, Nature.

[31]  Leon O. Chua THRESHOLD OF COMPLEXITY , 2006 .

[32]  Joachim M. Buhmann,et al.  Distortion Invariant Object Recognition in the Dynamic Link Architecture , 1993, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[33]  I. Biederman,et al.  Tuning for shape dimensions in macaque inferior temporal cortex , 2005, The European journal of neuroscience.

[34]  I. Biederman,et al.  Representation of regular and irregular shapes in macaque inferotemporal cortex. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[35]  Claus Bundesen,et al.  Visual pattern matching: Effects of size ratio, complexity, and similarity in simultaneous and successive matching , 1999 .

[36]  David J. Field,et al.  Contour integration by the human visual system: Evidence for a local “association field” , 1993, Vision Research.

[37]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Identification of everyday objects on the basis of Gaborized outline versions , 2010, i-Perception.

[38]  W. Epstein,et al.  The status of the minimum principle in the theoretical analysis of visual perception. , 1985, Psychological bulletin.

[39]  S. Edelman,et al.  Representation of object similarity in human vision: psychophysics and a computational model , 1998, Vision Research.

[40]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Identification of Everyday Objects on the Basis of Fragmented Outline Versions , 2008, Perception.

[41]  Richard N Aslin,et al.  Bayesian learning of visual chunks by human observers , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[43]  I Kovács,et al.  A closed curve is much more than an incomplete one: effect of closure in figure-ground segmentation. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[44]  F. Attneave Some informational aspects of visual perception. , 1954, Psychological review.

[45]  Gunter Loffler,et al.  Local and global contributions to shape discrimination , 2003, Vision Research.

[46]  M. Young,et al.  Sparse population coding of faces in the inferotemporal cortex. , 1992, Science.

[47]  Donald D. Hoffman,et al.  Codon constraints on closed 2D shapes , 1985, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[48]  I. Biederman,et al.  Shape Tuning in Macaque Inferior Temporal Cortex , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[49]  Robert L. Goldstone Unitization during category learning. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[50]  D. Perkins,et al.  How Good a Bet is Good Form? , 1976, Perception.

[51]  R N Shepard,et al.  Multidimensional Scaling, Tree-Fitting, and Clustering , 1980, Science.

[52]  R. Aslin,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article UNSUPERVISED STATISTICAL LEARNING OF HIGHER-ORDER SPATIAL STRUCTURES FROM VISUAL SCENES , 2022 .

[53]  E. Leeuwenberg,et al.  Goodness of visual regularities: a nontransformational approach. , 1996, Psychological review.

[54]  M. Behrmann,et al.  Impact of learning on representation of parts and wholes in monkey inferotemporal cortex , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[55]  David J. Freedman,et al.  A Comparison of Primate Prefrontal and Inferior Temporal Cortices during Visual Categorization , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[56]  J. Pellegrino,et al.  Stimulus complexity effects in visual comparisons: the effects of practice and learning context. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[57]  Anitha Pasupathy,et al.  Transformation of shape information in the ventral pathway , 2007, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[58]  David G. Lowe,et al.  Three-Dimensional Object Recognition from Single Two-Dimensional Images , 1987, Artif. Intell..

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

[60]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Contour-based object identification and segmentation: Stimuli, norms and data, and software tools , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[61]  S. Edelman,et al.  Differential Processing of Objects under Various Viewing Conditions in the Human Lateral Occipital Complex , 1999, Neuron.

[62]  F. Attneave,et al.  The determination of perceived tridimensional orientation by minimum criteria , 1969 .

[63]  E. Leeuwenberg Quantitative specification of information in sequential patterns. , 1969, Psychological review.

[64]  G. Orban,et al.  Selectivity for 3D shape that reveals distinct areas within macaque inferior temporal cortex. , 2000, Science.

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

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

[67]  I. Biederman,et al.  Recognizing depth-rotated objects: evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[68]  Shawn W. Ell,et al.  The neurobiology of human category learning , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[69]  R. Vogels,et al.  Inferotemporal neurons represent low-dimensional configurations of parameterized shapes , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[70]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Integration of contour and surface information in shape detection , 2011, Vision Research.

[71]  Steven C. Dakin,et al.  Absence of contour linking in peripheral vision , 1997, Nature.