Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38814385›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2025

Using drawings and deep neural networks to characterize the building blocks of human visual similarity.

Kushin Mukherjee, Timothy T Rogers

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors.

Kushin MukherjeeDepartment of Psychology & Wisconsin Institute for Discovery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. kmukherjee2@wisc.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-5013-6983
Timothy T RogersDepartment of Psychology & Wisconsin Institute for Discovery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Early in life and without special training, human beings discern resemblance between abstract visual stimuli, such as drawings, and the real-world objects they represent. We used this capacity for visual abstraction as a tool for evaluating deep neural networks (DNNs) as models of human visual perception. Contrasting five contemporary DNNs, we evaluated how well each explains human similarity judgments among line drawings of recognizable and novel objects. For object sketches, human judgments were dominated by semantic category information; DNN representations contributed little additional information. In contrast, such features explained significant unique variance perceived similarity of abstract drawings. In both cases, a vision transformer trained to blend representations of images and their natural language descriptions showed the greatest ability to explain human perceptual similarity-an observation consistent with contemporary views of semantic representation and processing in the human mind and brain. Together, the results suggest that the building blocks of visual similarity may arise within systems that learn to use visual information, not for specific classification, but in service of generating semantic representations of objects.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerPattern Recognition, VisualAdultFemaleHumansMaleSemanticsYoung AdultDeep LearningDrawingMulti-modal modelsPerceptionSimilarity Judgements

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.