ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2022
Analysis based on neural representation of natural object surfaces to elucidate the mechanisms of a trained AlexNet model.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Layer-specific feature preference in a trained AlexNet model revealed by stylized image analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Language Information Representation within the Left Inferior Parietal Lobule Network: An Intracranial SEEG Study.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- An analysis of information segregation in parallel streams of a multi-stream convolutional neural network.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Analysis and understanding of trained deep neural networks (DNNs) can deepen our understanding of the visual mechanisms involved in primate visual perception. However, due to the limited availability of neural activity data recorded from various cortical areas, the correspondence between the characteristics of artificial and biological neural responses for visually recognizing objects remains unclear at the layer level of DNNs. In the current study, we investigated the relationships between the artificial representations in each layer of a trained AlexNet model (based on a DNN) for object classification and the neural representations in various levels of visual cortices such as the primary visual (V1), intermediate visual (V4), and inferior temporal cortices. Furthermore, we analyzed the profiles of the artificial representations at a single channel level for each layer of the AlexNet model. We found that the artificial representations in the lower-level layers of the trained AlexNet model were strongly correlated with the neural representation in V1, whereas the responses of model neurons in layers at the intermediate and higher-intermediate levels of the trained object classification model exhibited characteristics similar to those of neural activity in V4 neurons. These results suggest that the trained AlexNet model may gradually establish artificial representations for object classification through the hierarchy of its network, in a similar manner to the neural mechanisms by which afferent transmission beginning in the low-level features gradually establishes object recognition as signals progress through the hierarchy of the ventral visual pathway.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.