IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1003167.html

Shape Similarity, Better than Semantic Membership, Accounts for the Structure of Visual Object Representations in a Population of Monkey Inferotemporal Neurons

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Baldassi
  • Alireza Alemi-Neissi
  • Marino Pagan
  • James J DiCarlo
  • Riccardo Zecchina
  • Davide Zoccolan

Abstract

The anterior inferotemporal cortex (IT) is the highest stage along the hierarchy of visual areas that, in primates, processes visual objects. Although several lines of evidence suggest that IT primarily represents visual shape information, some recent studies have argued that neuronal ensembles in IT code the semantic membership of visual objects (i.e., represent conceptual classes such as animate and inanimate objects). In this study, we investigated to what extent semantic, rather than purely visual information, is represented in IT by performing a multivariate analysis of IT responses to a set of visual objects. By relying on a variety of machine-learning approaches (including a cutting-edge clustering algorithm that has been recently developed in the domain of statistical physics), we found that, in most instances, IT representation of visual objects is accounted for by their similarity at the level of shape or, more surprisingly, low-level visual properties. Only in a few cases we observed IT representations of semantic classes that were not explainable by the visual similarity of their members. Overall, these findings reassert the primary function of IT as a conveyor of explicit visual shape information, and reveal that low-level visual properties are represented in IT to a greater extent than previously appreciated. In addition, our work demonstrates how combining a variety of state-of-the-art multivariate approaches, and carefully estimating the contribution of shape similarity to the representation of object categories, can substantially advance our understanding of neuronal coding of visual objects in cortex.Author Summary: To build meaningful representations of the external word, the stream of sensory information that reaches our senses is continuously processed and interpreted by the brain. Ultimately, such a processing allows the brain to arrange sensory (e.g., visual) inputs into a hierarchy of categories (such as animate and inanimate objects) and sub-categories (such as faces, animals, buildings, tools, etc). Crucially, while many objects can be assigned to the same category based on their visual similarity (e.g., oranges and apples), formation of most categories also requires arbitrarily associating objects sharing similar functions/meaning, but not similar shape (e.g., bananas and apples). A long-standing debate exists about whether the representation of visual objects in the higher visual centers of the brain (such as the inferotemporal cortex; IT) purely reflects shape similarity or also (and, perhaps, mainly) shape-unrelated categorical knowledge. In this study, we have addressed this issue by applying a variety of computational approaches. Our results show that the response patterns of a population of inferotemporal neurons are better accounted for by shape similarity than categorical membership. This reasserts the primary function of IT as a visual area and demonstrates how state-of-the-art computational approaches can advance our understanding of neuronal coding in the brain.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Baldassi & Alireza Alemi-Neissi & Marino Pagan & James J DiCarlo & Riccardo Zecchina & Davide Zoccolan, 2013. "Shape Similarity, Better than Semantic Membership, Accounts for the Structure of Visual Object Representations in a Population of Monkey Inferotemporal Neurons," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1003167
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003167
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003167&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003167?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. R. Quian Quiroga & L. Reddy & G. Kreiman & C. Koch & I. Fried, 2005. "Invariant visual representation by single neurons in the human brain," Nature, Nature, vol. 435(7045), pages 1102-1107, June.
    2. David J. Freedman & John A. Assad, 2006. "Experience-dependent representation of visual categories in parietal cortex," Nature, Nature, vol. 443(7107), pages 85-88, September.
    3. Claeskens,Gerda & Hjort,Nils Lid, 2008. "Model Selection and Model Averaging," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521852258, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jun Liu & Junyu Dong & Xiaoxu Cai & Lin Qi & Mike Chantler, 2015. "Visual Perception of Procedural Textures: Identifying Perceptual Dimensions and Predicting Generation Models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-22, June.

    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. Arthur Novaes de Amorim & Rob Deardon & Vineet Saini, 2021. "A stacked ensemble method for forecasting influenza-like illness visit volumes at emergency departments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Ivana Lolić & Petar Sorić & Marija Logarušić, 2022. "Economic Policy Uncertainty Index Meets Ensemble Learning," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 60(2), pages 401-437, August.
    3. Kitagawa, Toru & Muris, Chris, 2016. "Model averaging in semiparametric estimation of treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 271-289.
    4. Messner, Wolfgang, 2023. "The contingency impact of culture on health security capacities for pandemic preparedness: A moderated Bayesian inference analysis," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(5).
    5. Philippe Goulet Coulombe & Maxime Leroux & Dalibor Stevanovic & Stéphane Surprenant, 2022. "How is machine learning useful for macroeconomic forecasting?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(5), pages 920-964, August.
    6. Alexandra Ferreira‐Lopes & Pedro Linhares & Luís Filipe Martins & Tiago Neves Sequeira, 2022. "Quantitative easing and economic growth in Japan: A meta‐analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 235-268, February.
    7. Ahalya Prabhakar & Todd Murphey, 2022. "Mechanical intelligence for learning embodied sensor-object relationships," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-8, December.
    8. Davide Fiaschi & Andrea Mario Lavezzi & Angela Parenti, 2020. "Deep and Proximate Determinants of the World Income Distribution," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 66(3), pages 677-710, September.
    9. Zhang, Xiang & Saelens, Dirk & Roels, Staf, 2022. "Estimating dynamic solar gains from on-site measured data: An ARX modelling approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 321(C).
    10. Matthew W. Wheeler & Jose Cortiñas Abrahantes & Marc Aerts & Jeffery S. Gift & Jerry Allen Davis, 2022. "Continuous model averaging for benchmark dose analysis: Averaging over distributional forms," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(5), August.
    11. Samuel Müller & Alan H. Welsh, 2010. "On Model Selection Curves," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 78(2), pages 240-256, August.
    12. Riani, Marco & Atkinson, Anthony Curtis & Corbellini, Aldo & Farcomeni, Alessio & Laurini, Fabrizio, 2024. "Information Criteria for Outlier Detection Avoiding Arbitrary Significance Levels," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 189-205.
    13. Fabio Canova & Christian Matthes, 2021. "Dealing with misspecification in structural macroeconometric models," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), pages 313-350, May.
    14. Chang, Yung-Chi & Enkhjargal, Uguumur & Huang, Chen-I & Lin, Wen-Ling & Ho, Chi-Ming, 2020. "Factors Affecting the Internet Banking Adoption," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 54(3), pages 117-131.
    15. Yu, Jun & Meng, Xiran & Wang, Yaping, 2023. "Optimal designs for semi-parametric dose-response models under random contamination," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    16. Egil Ferkingstad & Anders L{o}land & Mathilde Wilhelmsen, 2011. "Causal modeling and inference for electricity markets," Papers 1110.5429, arXiv.org.
    17. Thomas P. Reber & Sina Mackay & Marcel Bausch & Marcel S. Kehl & Valeri Borger & Rainer Surges & Florian Mormann, 2023. "Single-neuron mechanisms of neural adaptation in the human temporal lobe," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    18. Philippe Van Kerm & Seunghee Yu & Chung Choe, 2016. "Decomposing quantile wage gaps: a conditional likelihood approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 65(4), pages 507-527, August.
    19. Martin Jullum & Nils Lid Hjort, 2019. "What price semiparametric Cox regression?," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 406-438, July.
    20. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Maruotti, Antonello, 2011. "The impact of urbanization on CO2 emissions: Evidence from developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1344-1353, May.

    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:pcbi00:1003167. 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.