ArticleJournal of vision2020
A dual foveal-peripheral visual processing model implements efficient saccade selection.
Article in Journal of vision, 2020. 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.
- Foveated Retinotopy Improves Classification and Localization in Convolutional Neural Networks.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The role of prediction and visual tracking strategies during manual interception: An exploration of individual differences.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Predictive processing of scenes and objects.Nature reviews psychology · 2024Article
- Ultrafast Image Categorization in Biology and Neural Models.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Biologically Inspired Deep Learning Model for Efficient Foveal-Peripheral Vision.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2021Article
- Introducing a Bayesian model of selective attention based on active inference.Scientific reports · 2019Article
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
We develop a visuomotor model that implements visual search as a focal accuracy-seeking policy, with the target's position and category drawn independently from a common generative process. Consistently with the anatomical separation between the ventral versus dorsal pathways, the model is composed of two pathways that respectively infer what to see and where to look. The "What" network is a classical deep learning classifier that only processes a small region around the center of fixation, providing a "foveal" accuracy. In contrast, the "Where" network processes the full visual field in a biomimetic fashion, using a log-polar retinotopic encoding, which is preserved up to the action selection level. In our model, the foveal accuracy is used as a monitoring signal to train the "Where" network, much like in the "actor/critic" framework. After training, the "Where" network provides an "accuracy map" that serves to guide the eye toward peripheral objects. Finally, the comparison of both networks' accuracies amounts to either selecting a saccade or keeping the eye focused at the center to identify the target. We test this setup on a simple task of finding a digit in a large, cluttered image. Our simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach, increasing by one order of magnitude the radius of the visual field toward which the agent can detect and recognize a target, either through a single saccade or with multiple ones. Importantly, our log-polar treatment of the visual information exploits the strong compression rate performed at the sensory level, providing ways to implement visual search in a sublinear fashion, in contrast with mainstream computer vision.
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.