IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1003468.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Slowness and Sparseness Have Diverging Effects on Complex Cell Learning

Author

Listed:
  • Jörn-Philipp Lies
  • Ralf M Häfner
  • Matthias Bethge

Abstract

Following earlier studies which showed that a sparse coding principle may explain the receptive field properties of complex cells in primary visual cortex, it has been concluded that the same properties may be equally derived from a slowness principle. In contrast to this claim, we here show that slowness and sparsity drive the representations towards substantially different receptive field properties. To do so, we present complete sets of basis functions learned with slow subspace analysis (SSA) in case of natural movies as well as translations, rotations, and scalings of natural images. SSA directly parallels independent subspace analysis (ISA) with the only difference that SSA maximizes slowness instead of sparsity. We find a large discrepancy between the filter shapes learned with SSA and ISA. We argue that SSA can be understood as a generalization of the Fourier transform where the power spectrum corresponds to the maximally slow subspace energies in SSA. Finally, we investigate the trade-off between slowness and sparseness when combined in one objective function.Author Summary: A key question in visual neuroscience is how neural representations achieve invariance against appearance changes of objects. In particular, the invariance of complex cell responses in primary visual cortex against small translations is commonly interpreted as a signature of an invariant coding strategy possibly originating from an unsupervised learning principle. Various models have been proposed to explain the response properties of complex cells using a sparsity or a slowness criterion and it has been concluded that physiologically plausible receptive field properties can be derived from either criterion. Here, we show that the effect of the two objectives on the resulting receptive field properties is in fact very different. We conclude that slowness alone cannot explain the filter shapes of complex cells and discuss what kind of experimental measurements could help us to better asses the role of slowness and sparsity for complex cell representations.

Suggested Citation

  • Jörn-Philipp Lies & Ralf M Häfner & Matthias Bethge, 2014. "Slowness and Sparseness Have Diverging Effects on Complex Cell Learning," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-11, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1003468
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003468
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003468&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003468?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yan Karklin & Michael S. Lewicki, 2009. "Emergence of complex cell properties by learning to generalize in natural scenes," Nature, Nature, vol. 457(7225), pages 83-86, January.
    2. Pietro Berkes & Richard E Turner & Maneesh Sahani, 2009. "A Structured Model of Video Reproduces Primary Visual Cortical Organisation," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(9), pages 1-16, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laurence Aitchison & Máté Lengyel, 2016. "The Hamiltonian Brain: Efficient Probabilistic Inference with Excitatory-Inhibitory Neural Circuit Dynamics," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Ruben Coen-Cagli & Peter Dayan & Odelia Schwartz, 2012. "Cortical Surround Interactions and Perceptual Salience via Natural Scene Statistics," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Iris I A Groen & Sennay Ghebreab & Victor A F Lamme & H Steven Scholte, 2012. "Spatially Pooled Contrast Responses Predict Neural and Perceptual Similarity of Naturalistic Image Categories," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Jeffrey D Fitzgerald & Ryan J Rowekamp & Lawrence C Sincich & Tatyana O Sharpee, 2011. "Second Order Dimensionality Reduction Using Minimum and Maximum Mutual Information Models," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-9, October.
    5. Qianli Yang & Edgar Walker & R. James Cotton & Andreas S. Tolias & Xaq Pitkow, 2021. "Revealing nonlinear neural decoding by analyzing choices," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Boris Vladimirskiy & Robert Urbanczik & Walter Senn, 2015. "Hierarchical Novelty-Familiarity Representation in the Visual System by Modular Predictive Coding," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1003468. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.