Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39741161›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2024

A computational deep learning investigation of animacy perception in the human brain.

Stefanie Duyck, Andrea I Costantino, Stefania Bracci, Hans Op de Beeck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Stefanie Duyck *Brain and Cognition, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Andrea I Costantino *Brain and Cognition, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. andreaivan.costantino@kuleuven.be.ORCID 0000-0002-8481-3142
Stefania BracciCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Trento, Italy.
Hans Op de BeeckBrain and Cognition, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-2250-212X

Funding

KU Leuven (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven) C14/21/047
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The functional organization of the human object vision pathway distinguishes between animate and inanimate objects. To understand animacy perception, we explore the case of zoomorphic objects resembling animals. While the perception of these objects as animal-like seems obvious to humans, such "Animal bias" is a striking discrepancy between the human brain and deep neural networks (DNNs). We computationally investigated the potential origins of this bias. We successfully induced this bias in DNNs trained explicitly with zoomorphic objects. Alternative training schedules failed to cause an Animal bias. We considered the superordinate distinction between animate and inanimate classes, the sensitivity for faces and bodies, the bias for shape over texture, the role of ecologically valid categories, recurrent connections, and language-informed visual processing. These findings provide computational support that the Animal bias for zoomorphic objects is a unique property of human perception yet can be explained by human learning history.

Indexed as

BrainDeep LearningAnimalsHumansNeural Networks, ComputerVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID39741161
PMCPMC11688457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.