Similarity, Typicality, and Category-Level Matching of Morphed Outlines of Everyday Objects

During visual object categorisation, a match must be found between the input image and stored information about basic-level categories. Graf [2002 Form, Space and Object (Berlin: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Berlin)] suggested the involvement of analogue transformational, shape-changing processes in aligning the memory representation of the category with the perceptual representation of the current stimulus. Here we compare the predictions of alignment models with those of exemplar-based models, using morphing between four exemplar outlines within each of eleven categories. Overall, with increasing transformational distance between two exemplars of the same category, reaction times to decide whether they belong to the same category in a sequential matching paradigm increased, while rated similarity between the two exemplars decreased. However, in contrast to alignment accounts, exemplar-based accounts can correctly predict the observed dissociation between typicality and categorisation time, and allow the observed deviations from sequential additivity and nonlinear relations between transformational distance and rated similarity. Discussion of integrations of exemplar-based theories with neglected processes, such as information accumulation, response competition, response priming, and gain-modulation leads to a view of the recognition process from input to response, which increases the validity and scope of modern exemplar-based categorisation and recognition models.

[1]  R. Nosofsky Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986 .

[2]  M. Tarr,et al.  Do viewpoint-dependent mechanisms generalize across members of a class? , 1998, Cognition.

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

[4]  Heinrich H Bülthoff,et al.  Image-based object recognition in man, monkey and machine , 1998, Cognition.

[5]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification. , 1997, Psychological review.

[6]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Central Tendencies, Extreme Points, and Prototype Enhancement Effects in Ill-Defined Perceptual Categorization , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[7]  D. Gentner,et al.  Structural Alignment during Similarity Comparisons , 1993, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  Shimon Edelman,et al.  The interaction of shape- and location-based priming in object categorisation: Evidence for a hybrid “what+where” representation stage , 2005, Vision Research.

[9]  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.

[10]  Markus Graf,et al.  Coordinate transformations in object recognition. , 2006, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  N. Chater,et al.  Similarity as transformation , 2003, Cognition.

[12]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 2004 .

[13]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Visual Object Categorisation at Distinct Levels of Abstraction: A New Stimulus Set , 2001, Perception.

[14]  I. Rybak,et al.  A model of attention-guided visual perception and recognition , 1998, Vision Research.

[15]  Kenji Kawano,et al.  Global and fine information coded by single neurons in the temporal visual cortex , 1999, Nature.

[16]  K. Lamberts Information-accumulation theory of speeded categorization. , 2000, Psychological review.

[17]  R. Vogels,et al.  The representation of perceived shape similarity and its role for category learning in monkeys: A modeling study , 2008, Vision Research.

[18]  M. Bar A Cortical Mechanism for Triggering Top-Down Facilitation in Visual Object Recognition , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  C. Bundesen,et al.  Size scaling in visual pattern recognition. , 1978, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  S Edelman,et al.  Representation is representation of similarities , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[21]  I. Gauthier,et al.  Visual object understanding , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

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

[23]  P. Schyns,et al.  Categories and percepts: a bi-directionnal framework for categorization , 1997, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[24]  Z. A. Trapeznikova On the Interaction of , 1959 .

[25]  J. B. Pittenger,et al.  Aging faces as viscal-elastic events: implications for a theory of nonrigid shape perception. , 1975, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  J. Todd,et al.  Describing perceptual information about human growth in terms of geometric invariants , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  David L. Sheinberg,et al.  Activity of Inferior Temporal Cortical Neurons Predicts Recognition Choice Behavior and Recognition Time during Visual Search , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[28]  P. Schyns,et al.  Categorization creates functional features , 1997 .

[29]  R. Shepard,et al.  Mental Images and Their Transformations , 1982 .

[30]  Koen Lamberts Information-accumulation theory of speeded categorization. , 2000 .

[31]  Markus Graf Form, Space and Object: Geometrical Transformations in Object Recognition and Categorization , 2002 .

[32]  Alex Martin,et al.  Properties and mechanisms of perceptual priming , 1998, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[33]  Daniel L. Schacter,et al.  Priming and Multiple Memory Systems: Perceptual Mechanisms of Implicit Memory , 1992, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[34]  Philippe G Schyns,et al.  Diagnostic recognition: task constraints, object information, and their interactions , 1998, Cognition.

[35]  R N Henson,et al.  Mechanisms of top-down facilitation in perception of visual objects studied by FMRI. , 2007, Cerebral cortex.

[36]  Safa R. Zaki,et al.  Prototype and exemplar accounts of category learning and attentional allocation: a reassessment. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

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

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

[39]  Drew H. Abney,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance Influence of Musical Groove on Postural Sway , 2015 .

[40]  I. Gauthier,et al.  Computational approaches to the development of perceptual expertise , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[42]  F. Tong,et al.  The timing of perceptual decisions for ambiguous face stimuli in the human ventral visual cortex. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[43]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Shape equivalence under perspective and projective transformations , 1997, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[44]  C Bundesen,et al.  Visual Apparent Movement: Transformations of Size and Orientation , 1983, Perception.

[45]  S. Hochstein,et al.  View from the Top Hierarchies and Reverse Hierarchies in the Visual System , 2002, Neuron.

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

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

[48]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  The Visual System's Measurement of Invariants Need Not Itself Be Invariant , 1996 .

[49]  J. Wagemans,et al.  Mental rotation versus invariant features in object perception from different viewpoints: an fMRI study , 2002, Neuropsychologia.

[50]  Peter König,et al.  Invariant representations of visual patterns in a temporal population code , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[51]  G W Humphreys,et al.  The combined effects of plane disorientation and foreshortening on picture naming: one manipulation or two? , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[52]  W. Newsome,et al.  A general mechanism for decision-making in the human brain? , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[53]  Michael C Mozer,et al.  Frames of reference in unilateral neglect and visual perception: a computational perspective. , 2002, Psychological review.

[54]  R. Romo,et al.  Temporal Evolution of a Decision-Making Process in Medial Premotor Cortex , 2002, Neuron.

[55]  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.

[56]  Lin Chen The topological approach to perceptual organization , 2005 .

[57]  P. Schyns,et al.  Categorization creates functional features , 1997 .

[58]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Identification of Everyday Objects on the Basis of Silhouette and Outline Versions , 2007, Perception.

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

[60]  J. Wagemans,et al.  Low-level correlations between object properties and viewpoint can cause viewpoint-dependent object recognition. , 2007, Spatial vision.

[61]  Nathan Intrator,et al.  (coarse Coding of Shape Fragments) (retinotopy) Representation of Structure , 2000 .

[62]  Thomas F Münte,et al.  Temporal dynamics of early perceptual processing , 1998, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[63]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  View-specific effects of depth rotation and foreshortening on the initial recognition and priming of familiar objects , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[64]  J. Kruschke,et al.  ALCOVE: an exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. , 1992, Psychological review.

[65]  Safa R. Zaki,et al.  Exemplar and prototype models revisited: response strategies, selective attention, and stimulus generalization. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[66]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Orientation Congruency Effects for Familiar Objects , 2005, Psychological science.

[67]  H T Kukkonen,et al.  Qualitative Cues in the Discrimination of Affine-Transformed Minimal Patterns , 1996, Perception.

[68]  Shimon Edelman,et al.  Representation and recognition in vision , 1999 .

[69]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Varieties of size-specific visual selection. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[70]  J Wagemans,et al.  Matching multicomponent objects from different viewpoints: mental rotation as normalization? , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[71]  David D. Cox,et al.  Untangling invariant object recognition , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[73]  E. Halgren,et al.  Top-down facilitation of visual recognition. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[74]  R M Nosofsky,et al.  Comparing exemplar-retrieval and decision-bound models of speeded perceptual classification , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[75]  R M Nosofsky,et al.  An exemplar-retrieval model of speeded same--different judgments. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[76]  S. Ullman Three-dimensional object recognition based on the combination of views , 1998, Cognition.

[77]  Douglas L. Medin,et al.  Context theory of classification learning. , 1978 .

[78]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Graded motor responses in the time course of categorizing atypical exemplars , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[79]  J. O'Regan,et al.  Solving the "real" mysteries of visual perception: the world as an outside memory. , 1992, Canadian journal of psychology.

[80]  E. Rosch,et al.  Categorization of Natural Objects , 1981 .

[81]  R. Nosofsky Exemplar-Based Accounts of Relations Between Classification, Recognition, and Typicality , 1988 .

[82]  J T Todd,et al.  Perception of growth: a geometric analysis of how different styles of change are distinguished. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[83]  Manila Vannucci,et al.  Category Effects on the Processing of Plane-Rotated Objects , 2000, Perception.

[84]  S. Ullman Aligning pictorial descriptions: An approach to object recognition , 1989, Cognition.

[85]  D. Gentner,et al.  Splitting the Differences: A Structural Alignment View of Similarity , 1993 .

[86]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Continuous Dynamics in Real-Time Cognition , 2006 .

[87]  L Chen,et al.  Topological Structure in the Perception of Apparent Motion , 1985, Perception.

[88]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[89]  B Willems,et al.  Multiple Routes to Object Matching from Different Viewpoints: Mental Rotation versus Invariant Features , 2001, Perception.

[90]  John Lisman,et al.  Recognition by top-down and bottom-up processing in cortex: the control of selective attention. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[91]  Ramesh C. Jain,et al.  Three-dimensional object recognition , 1985, CSUR.

[92]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Asymmetries in Stimulus Comparisons by Monkey and Man , 2003, Current Biology.

[93]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  A general mechanism for perceptual decision-making in the human brain , 2004, Nature.

[94]  Elan Barenholtz,et al.  Visual judgment of similarity across shape transformations: evidence for a compositional model of articulated objects. , 2008, Acta psychologica.

[95]  J T Todd,et al.  Perception of growth from changes in body proportions. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[96]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Three-dimensional object recognition is viewpoint dependent , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[97]  J T Todd,et al.  On the Relative Salience of Euclidean, Affine, and Topological Structure for 3-D Form Discrimination , 1998, Perception.

[98]  R. Nosofsky Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[99]  P. Jolicoeur,et al.  Orientation congruency effects on the identification of disoriented shapes. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[100]  J. Wagemans,et al.  The Representation of Shape in the Context of Visual Object Categorization Tasks , 2000, NeuroImage.

[101]  D. Perrett,et al.  Evidence accumulation in cell populations responsive to faces: an account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations , 1998, Cognition.

[102]  Wolfgang Spohn,et al.  The Representation of , 1986 .

[103]  Markus Graf,et al.  Categorization and Object Shape , 2010 .

[104]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  The representation of subordinate shape similarity in human occipitotemporal cortex. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[105]  James T. Enns,et al.  Clusters Precede Shapes in Perceptual Organization , 1997 .

[106]  J. D. Smith,et al.  Journey to the center of the category: the dissociation in amnesia between categorization and recognition. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[107]  I. Gauthier,et al.  Visual Neurons: Categorization-Based Selectivity , 2002, Current Biology.

[108]  C W Eriksen,et al.  Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[109]  M. Tarr,et al.  Orientation Priming of Novel Shapes in the Context of Viewpoint-Dependent Recognition , 1997, Perception.

[110]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Varieties of size-specific visual selection. , 1989 .

[111]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Subordinate Categorization Enhances the Neural Selectivity in Human Object-selective Cortex for Fine Shape Differences , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[112]  B. Schölkopf,et al.  Generalization and similarity in exemplar models of categorization: Insights from machine learning , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[113]  J Wagemans,et al.  Invariance from the Euclidean Geometer's Perspective , 1994, Perception.

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

[115]  Tomaso Poggio,et al.  Generalization in vision and motor control , 2004, Nature.

[116]  R Lawson,et al.  Achieving visual object constancy across plane rotation and depth rotation. , 1999, Acta psychologica.

[117]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Time-course contingencies in perceptual organization and identification of fragmented object outlines. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[118]  T. Sejnowski,et al.  Book Review: Gain Modulation in the Central Nervous System: Where Behavior, Neurophysiology, and Computation Meet , 2001, The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry.

[119]  Shimon Edelman,et al.  Representation of similarity as a goal of early visual processing , 1995 .

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