ArticlePLoS computational biology2023
The representational hierarchy in human and artificial visual systems in the presence of object-scene regularities.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating action topography in visual cortex and deep artificial neural networks.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Synthesizing images to map neural networks to the human brain.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Deep Learning for Image Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Esophageal Cancer.Cancers · 2024Review
- Fine-grained knowledge about manipulable objects is well-predicted by contrastive language image pre-training.iScience · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human vision is still largely unexplained. Computer vision made impressive progress on this front, but it is still unclear to which extent artificial neural networks approximate human object vision at the behavioral and neural levels. Here, we investigated whether machine object vision mimics the representational hierarchy of human object vision with an experimental design that allows testing within-domain representations for animals and scenes, as well as across-domain representations reflecting their real-world contextual regularities such as animal-scene pairs that often co-occur in the visual environment. We found that DCNNs trained in object recognition acquire representations, in their late processing stage, that closely capture human conceptual judgements about the co-occurrence of animals and their typical scenes. Likewise, the DCNNs representational hierarchy shows surprising similarities with the representational transformations emerging in domain-specific ventrotemporal areas up to domain-general frontoparietal areas. Despite these remarkable similarities, the underlying information processing differs. The ability of neural networks to learn a human-like high-level conceptual representation of object-scene co-occurrence depends upon the amount of object-scene co-occurrence present in the image set thus highlighting the fundamental role of training history. Further, although mid/high-level DCNN layers represent the category division for animals and scenes as observed in VTC, its information content shows reduced domain-specific representational richness. To conclude, by testing within- and between-domain selectivity while manipulating contextual regularities we reveal unknown similarities and differences in the information processing strategies employed by human and artificial visual systems.
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.