bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Costantino, A. I.

Publications and source records attributed to Costantino, A. I..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Recurrent issues with deep neural networks of visual recognition

Object recognition requires flexible and robust information processing, especially in view of the challenges posed by naturalistic visual settings. The ventral stream in visual cortex is provided with this robustness by its recurrent connectivity. Recurrent deep neural networks (DNNs) have recently emerged as promising models of the ventral stream, surpassing feedforward DNNs in the ability to account for brain representations. In this study, we asked whether recurrent DNNs could also better account for human behaviour during visual recognition. We assembled a stimulus set that included manipulations that are often associated with recurrent processing in the literature, like occlusion, partial viewing, clutter, and spatial phase scrambling. We obtained a benchmark dataset from human participants performing a categorisation task on this stimulus set. By applying a wide range of model architectures to the same task, we uncovered a nuanced relationship between recurrence, model size, and performance. While recurrent models reach higher performance than their feedforward counterpart, we could not dissociate this improvement from that obtained by increasing model size. We found consistency between humans and models patterns of difficulty across the visual manipulations, but this was not modulated in an obvious way by the specific type of recurrence or size added to the model. Finally, depth/size rather than recurrence makes model confusion patterns more human-like. Contrary to previous assumptions, our findings challenge the notion that recurrent models are better models of human recognition behaviour than feedforward models, and emphasise the complexity of incorporating recurrence into computational models.

neuroscience↗

Partial information transfer from peripheral visual streams to foveal visual streams is mediated through local primary visual circuits

A classic view holds that visual object recognition is driven through the what pathway in which perceptual features of increasing abstractness are computed in a sequence of different visual cortical regions. The cortical origin of this pathway, the primary visual cortex (V1), has a retinotopic organization such that neurons have receptive fields tuned to specific regions of the visual field. That is, a neuron that responds to a stimulus in the center of the visual field will not respond to a stimulus in the periphery of the visual field, and vice versa. However, despite this fundamental design feature, the overall processing of stimuli in the periphery - while clearly dependent on processing by neurons in the peripheral regions of V1 - can be clearly altered by the processing of neurons in the fovea region of V1. For instance, it has been shown that task-relevant, non-retinotopic feedback information about peripherally presented stimuli can be decoded in the unstimulated foveal cortex, and that the disruption of this feedback - through Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation or behavioral masking paradigms - has detrimental effects on same/different discrimination behavior. Here, we used fMRI multivariate decoding techniques and functional connectivity analyses to assess the nature of the information that is encoded in the periphery-to-fovea feedback projection and to gain insight into how it may be anatomically implemented. Participants performed a same/different discrimination task on images of real-world stimuli (motorbikes, cars, female and male faces) displayed peripherally. We were able to decode only a subset of these categories from the activity measured in peripheral V1, and a further reduced subset from the activity measured in foveal V1, indicating that the feedback from periphery to fovea may be subject to information loss. Functional connectivity analysis revealed that foveal V1 was functionally connected only to the peripheral V1 and not to later-stage visual areas, indicating that the feedback from peripheral to foveal V1 is likely implemented by neural circuits local to V1.

neuroscience↗