Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41824548›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2026

Hierarchical abstraction drives human-like 3-D shape processing in deep learning models.

Shuhao Fu, Philip J Kellman, Hongjing Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Shuhao FuDepartment of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2672-5125
Philip J KellmanDepartment of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Hongjing LuDepartment of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Both humans and deep learning models can recognize objects from 3D shapes depicted with sparse visual information, such as a set of points randomly sampled from the surfaces of 3D objects (termed a point cloud). Although deep learning models achieve human-like performance in recognizing objects from 3D shapes, it remains unclear whether these models develop 3D shape representations similar to those used by human vision for object recognition. Evidence suggests that training with approximately 10,000 object instances enables models to acquire representations of local geometric structures in 3D shapes. We hypothesize, however, that their representations of 3D global shapes are still limited. To test this hypothesis, we conducted three human experiments systematically manipulating point density and object orientation (Experiment 1), local geometric structure (Experiment 2), and part configuration (Experiment 3). Human performance was stable across conditions in the first two experiments, but declined significantly in the part-scrambled condition of the final experiment. We compared human performance with two types of deep learning architectures: convolution-based models (e.g., DGCNN) and transformer-based models (e.g., Point Transformer). The transformer-based models more closely captured human performance patterns across experimental conditions. Ablation simulations revealed that this advantage is largely driven by progressive downsampling operations that enable hierarchical abstraction of 3D shapes.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImaging, Three-DimensionalAdultComputational BiologyConvolutional Neural NetworksFemaleHumansMalePattern Recognition, Visual

Identifiers

PMID41824548
PMCPMC13052885

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.