Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36545653›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cellular neuroscience2022

Efficient processing of natural scenes in visual cortex.

Tiberiu Tesileanu, Eugenio Piasini, Vijay Balasubramanian

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cellular neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

3 authors.

Tiberiu TesileanuCenter for Computational Neuroscience, Flatiron Institute, New York, NY, United States.
Eugenio PiasiniScuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati (SISSA), Trieste, Italy.
Vijay BalasubramanianDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, David Rittenhouse Laboratory, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neural circuits in the periphery of the visual, auditory, and olfactory systems are believed to use limited resources efficiently to represent sensory information by adapting to the statistical structure of the natural environment. This "efficient coding" principle has been used to explain many aspects of early visual circuits including the distribution of photoreceptors, the mosaic geometry and center-surround structure of retinal receptive fields, the excess OFF pathways relative to ON pathways, saccade statistics, and the structure of simple cell receptive fields in V1. We know less about the extent to which such adaptations may occur in deeper areas of cortex beyond V1. We thus review recent developments showing that the perception of visual textures, which depends on processing in V2 and beyond in mammals, is adapted in rats and humans to the multi-point statistics of luminance in natural scenes. These results suggest that central circuits in the visual brain are adapted for seeing key aspects of natural scenes. We conclude by discussing how adaptation to natural temporal statistics may aid in learning and representing visual objects, and propose two challenges for the future: (1) explaining the distribution of shape sensitivity in the ventral visual stream from the statistics of object shape in natural images, and (2) explaining cell types of the vertebrate retina in terms of feature detectors that are adapted to the spatio-temporal structures of natural stimuli. We also discuss how new methods based on machine learning may complement the normative, principles-based approach to theoretical neuroscience.

Indexed as

efficient coding hypothesisnatural scene analysissensory systemtextures analysisvisual cortex (VC)

Identifiers

PMID36545653
PMCPMC9760692

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.