ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
The Impact of Scene Context on Visual Object Recognition: Comparing Humans, Monkeys, and Computational Models.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
During natural vision, we rarely see objects in isolation but rather embedded in rich and complex contexts. Understanding how the brain recognizes objects in natural scenes by integrating contextual information remains a key challenge. To elucidate neural mechanisms compatible with human visual processing, we need an animal model that behaves similarly to humans, so that inferred neural mechanisms can provide hypotheses relevant to the human brain. Here we assessed whether rhesus macaques could model human context-driven object recognition by quantifying visual object identification abilities across variations in the amount, quality, and congruency of contextual cues. Behavioral metrics revealed strikingly similar context-dependent patterns between humans and monkeys. However, neural responses in the inferior temporal (IT) cortex of monkeys that were never explicitly trained to discriminate objects in context, as well as current artificial neural network models, could only partially explain this cross-species correspondence. The shared behavioral variance unexplained by context-naive neural data or computational models highlights fundamental knowledge gaps. Our findings demonstrate an intriguing alignment of human and monkey visual object processing that defies full explanation by either brain activity in a key visual region or state-of-the-art models.
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.