Skip to main content

Rapid Categorization of Extrafoveal Natural Images: Implications for Biological Models

  • Chapter
Book cover Computational Neuroscience

Abstract

Despite intensive research over the past 30 years, the performance of artificial visual systems in object recognition is still poor when compared with humans. For humans, the identification of objects in natural scenes appears both effortless and fast. Just how fast was a question we addressed recently in a study that associated behavioral measurements and event related potential (ERP) recordings1. The task used was a go/no-go visual categorization task in which human subjects had to respond when a photograph of a natural scene contained an animal. The photographs had never been seen before and were flashed centrally on a screen for only 20 ms. Humans scored 94% correct, moreover, their ERPs recorded on animal and non-animal trials showed a clear difference on all frontal electrodes that started around 150 ms after stimuli onset. Thus, it appears that the human visual system can process such previously unseen complex natural scenes in less than 150 ms, a level of performance well above that of any currently available artificial system. This is despite the fact that the neurons that constitute the human visual system are relatively slow — firing rates rarely exceed 200 Hz, a value far slower than the transistors of a modern microprocessor, which can change state over a million times faster.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. SJ. Thorpe, D. Fize, and C. Marlot, Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 381: 520–522 (1996).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. M.D. Rugg, M.C. Doyle, and T. Wells, Word and nonword repetition within-modality and across-modality. An event-related potential study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 7: 209–227 (1995). 3.1. Biederman and E.E. Cooper, Object recognition and laterality: null effects. Neuropsychologia 29: 685-694 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. M. Vitkovitch and G. Underwood, Visual field differences in an object-recognition task. Brain and Cognition 19: 195–207 (1992).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. C.J. Downing, Expectancy and visuo-spatial attention: Effects on perceptual quality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 13: 228–241 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  5. N. Lavie and Y. Tsal, Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention. Perception and Psychophysics 56: 183–197 (1994).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. C.W. Eriksen and Y.Y. Yeh, Allocation of attention in the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 11: 583–597 (1985).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. J.M. Henderson, K.K. McClure, S. Pierce, and G. Schrock, Object identification without foveal vision: Evidence from an artificial scotoma paradigm. Perception and Psychophysics 59: 323–346 (1997).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. T.C. Handy, A. Kingstone, and G.R. Mangun, Spatial distribution of visual attention: Perceptual sensitivity and response latency. Perception and Psychophysics 58: 613–627 (1996).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. SJ. Thorpe and M. Imbert, Biological constraints on connectionist models., in: Connectionism in Perspective., R. Pfeifer, Z. Schreter, F. Fogelman-Soulié, & L. Steels, eds., Elsevier: Amsterdam. 63–92. (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  10. B.A. Olshausen, C.H. Anderson, and D.C. Van Essen, A multiscale dynamic routing circuit for forming size-and position-invariant object representations. Journal of Computational Neuroscience 2: 45–62 (1995).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fabre-Thorpe, M., Fize, D., Richard, G., Thorpe, S. (1998). Rapid Categorization of Extrafoveal Natural Images: Implications for Biological Models. In: Bower, J.M. (eds) Computational Neuroscience. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4831-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4831-7_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7190-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-4831-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics