Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28991906›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2017

Object detection through search with a foveated visual system.

Emre Akbas, Miguel P Eckstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Distinct system-level computations underlie perceptual variation across the visual field.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Foveated Light-Field Compound Imager.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Spatiotemporal Evidence Accumulation Through Saccadic Sampling for Object Recognition.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The effects of eccentricity on attentional capture.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024
    Article
  10. Predictive processing of scenes and objects.Nature reviews psychology · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Medical image quality metrics for foveated model observers.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Foveated Model Observers for Visual Search in 3D Medical Images.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Emre AkbasDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3760-6722
Miguel P EcksteinDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.

Funding

Assessment of medical image quality with foveated search modelsR01EB018958 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA · PI ECKSTEIN, MIGUEL PATRICIO · 2015 to 2018
$1.7M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB018958NIEHS NIH HHS 27302C0028
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans and many other species sense visual information with varying spatial resolution across the visual field (foveated vision) and deploy eye movements to actively sample regions of interests in scenes. The advantage of such varying resolution architecture is a reduced computational, hence metabolic cost. But what are the performance costs of such processing strategy relative to a scheme that processes the visual field at high spatial resolution? Here we first focus on visual search and combine object detectors from computer vision with a recent model of peripheral pooling regions found at the V1 layer of the human visual system. We develop a foveated object detector that processes the entire scene with varying resolution, uses retino-specific object detection classifiers to guide eye movements, aligns its fovea with regions of interest in the input image and integrates observations across multiple fixations. We compared the foveated object detector against a non-foveated version of the same object detector which processes the entire image at homogeneous high spatial resolution. We evaluated the accuracy of the foveated and non-foveated object detectors identifying 20 different objects classes in scenes from a standard computer vision data set (the PASCAL VOC 2007 dataset). We show that the foveated object detector can approximate the performance of the object detector with homogeneous high spatial resolution processing while bringing significant computational cost savings. Additionally, we assessed the impact of foveation on the computation of bottom-up saliency. An implementation of a simple foveated bottom-up saliency model with eye movements showed agreement in the selection of top salient regions of scenes with those selected by a non-foveated high resolution saliency model. Together, our results might help explain the evolution of foveated visual systems with eye movements as a solution that preserves perceptual performance in visual search while resulting in computational and metabolic savings to the brain.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAnimalsAttentionBiomimeticsComputer SimulationEye MovementsFixation, OcularFovea CentralisHumansPattern Recognition, AutomatedPattern Recognition, VisualSpace PerceptionVisual CortexVisual Fields

Identifiers

PMID28991906
PMCPMC5669499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.