Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Neurosci ; 43(3): 484-500, 2023 01 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36535769

ABSTRACT

Drawings offer a simple and efficient way to communicate meaning. While line drawings capture only coarsely how objects look in reality, we still perceive them as resembling real-world objects. Previous work has shown that this perceived similarity is mirrored by shared neural representations for drawings and natural images, which suggests that similar mechanisms underlie the recognition of both. However, other work has proposed that representations of drawings and natural images become similar only after substantial processing has taken place, suggesting distinct mechanisms. To arbitrate between those alternatives, we measured brain responses resolved in space and time using fMRI and MEG, respectively, while human participants (female and male) viewed images of objects depicted as photographs, line drawings, or sketch-like drawings. Using multivariate decoding, we demonstrate that object category information emerged similarly fast and across overlapping regions in occipital, ventral-temporal, and posterior parietal cortex for all types of depiction, yet with smaller effects at higher levels of visual abstraction. In addition, cross-decoding between depiction types revealed strong generalization of object category information from early processing stages on. Finally, by combining fMRI and MEG data using representational similarity analysis, we found that visual information traversed similar processing stages for all types of depiction, yet with an overall stronger representation for photographs. Together, our results demonstrate broad commonalities in the neural dynamics of object recognition across types of depiction, thus providing clear evidence for shared neural mechanisms underlying recognition of natural object images and abstract drawings.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT When we see a line drawing, we effortlessly recognize it as an object in the world despite its simple and abstract style. Here we asked to what extent this correspondence in perception is reflected in the brain. To answer this question, we measured how neural processing of objects depicted as photographs and line drawings with varying levels of detail (from natural images to abstract line drawings) evolves over space and time. We find broad commonalities in the spatiotemporal dynamics and the neural representations underlying the perception of photographs and even abstract drawings. These results indicate a shared basic mechanism supporting recognition of drawings and natural images.


Subject(s)
Pattern Recognition, Visual , Visual Perception , Humans , Male , Female , Pattern Recognition, Visual/physiology , Photic Stimulation/methods , Visual Perception/physiology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Parietal Lobe/physiology , Brain Mapping/methods
2.
J Vis ; 22(2): 4, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35129578

ABSTRACT

Line drawings convey meaning with just a few strokes. Despite strong simplifications, humans can recognize objects depicted in such abstracted images without effort. To what degree do deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) mirror this human ability to generalize to abstracted object images? While CNNs trained on natural images have been shown to exhibit poor classification performance on drawings, other work has demonstrated highly similar latent representations in the networks for abstracted and natural images. Here, we address these seemingly conflicting findings by analyzing the activation patterns of a CNN trained on natural images across a set of photographs, drawings, and sketches of the same objects and comparing them to human behavior. We find a highly similar representational structure across levels of visual abstraction in early and intermediate layers of the network. This similarity, however, does not translate to later stages in the network, resulting in low classification performance for drawings and sketches. We identified that texture bias in CNNs contributes to the dissimilar representational structure in late layers and the poor performance on drawings. Finally, by fine-tuning late network layers with object drawings, we show that performance can be largely restored, demonstrating the general utility of features learned on natural images in early and intermediate layers for the recognition of drawings. In conclusion, generalization to abstracted images, such as drawings, seems to be an emergent property of CNNs trained on natural images, which is, however, suppressed by domain-related biases that arise during later processing stages in the network.


Subject(s)
Neural Networks, Computer , Visual Perception , Concept Formation , Humans , Learning , Recognition, Psychology , Visual Perception/physiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...