ArticlePLoS computational biology2023
Mechanisms of human dynamic object recognition revealed by sequential deep neural networks.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- The speed limit of visual perception: Bidirectional influence of image memorability and processing speed on perceived duration and recognition.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Maintenance and transformation of representational formats during working memory prioritization.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Volleyball training video classification description using the BiLSTM fusion attention mechanism.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Feature binding is slow: Temporal integration explains apparent ultrafast binding.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Memorability shapes perceived time (and vice versa).Nature human behaviour · 2024Article
- Empirically Identifying and Computationally Modeling the Brain-Behavior Relationship for Human Scene Categorization.Journal of cognitive 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
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans can quickly recognize objects in a dynamically changing world. This ability is showcased by the fact that observers succeed at recognizing objects in rapidly changing image sequences, at up to 13 ms/image. To date, the mechanisms that govern dynamic object recognition remain poorly understood. Here, we developed deep learning models for dynamic recognition and compared different computational mechanisms, contrasting feedforward and recurrent, single-image and sequential processing as well as different forms of adaptation. We found that only models that integrate images sequentially via lateral recurrence mirrored human performance (N = 36) and were predictive of trial-by-trial responses across image durations (13-80 ms/image). Importantly, models with sequential lateral-recurrent integration also captured how human performance changes as a function of image presentation durations, with models processing images for a few time steps capturing human object recognition at shorter presentation durations and models processing images for more time steps capturing human object recognition at longer presentation durations. Furthermore, augmenting such a recurrent model with adaptation markedly improved dynamic recognition performance and accelerated its representational dynamics, thereby predicting human trial-by-trial responses using fewer processing resources. Together, these findings provide new insights into the mechanisms rendering object recognition so fast and effective in a dynamic visual world.
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.