ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2022
Disrupted visual input unveils the computational details of artificial neural networks for face perception.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Approximate solutions to several classes of Volterra and Fredholm integral equations using the neural network algorithm based on the sine-cosine basis function and extreme learning machine.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN), with its great performance, has attracted attention of researchers from many disciplines. The studies of the DCNN and that of biological neural systems have inspired each other reciprocally. The brain-inspired neural networks not only achieve great performance but also serve as a computational model of biological neural systems. Methods: Here in this study, we trained and tested several typical DCNNs (AlexNet, VGG11, VGG13, VGG16, DenseNet, MobileNet, and EfficientNet) with a face ethnicity categorization task for experiment 1, and an emotion categorization task for experiment 2. We measured the performance of DCNNs by testing them with original and lossy visual inputs (various kinds of image occlusion) and compared their performance with human participants. Moreover, the class activation map (CAM) method allowed us to visualize the foci of the "attention" of these DCNNs. Results: The results suggested that the VGG13 performed the best: Its performance closely resembled human participants in terms of psychophysics measurements, it utilized similar areas of visual inputs as humans, and it had the most consistent performance with inputs having various kinds of impairments. Discussion: In general, we examined the processing mechanism of DCNNs using a new paradigm and found that VGG13 might be the most human-like DCNN in this task. This study also highlighted a possible paradigm to study and develop DCNNs using human perception as a benchmark.
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.