Cited by 407Visual perception and processing mechanismsFace Recognition and PerceptionVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Recurrence is required to capture the representational dynamics of the human visual system

Open access
Kietzmann, Tim C., Spoerer, Courtney J., Sörensen, Lynn K. A., Cichy, Radoslaw M., Hauk, Olaf, Kriegeskorte, Nikolaus·2019·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Understanding the computational principles that underlie human vision is a key challenge for neuroscience and could help improve machine vision. Feedforward neural network models process their input through a deep cascade of computations. These models can recognize objects in images and explain aspects of human rapid recognition. However, the human brain contains recurrent connections within and between stages of the cascade, which are missing from the models that dominate both engineering and neuroscience. Here, we measure and model the dynamics of human brain activity during visual perception. We compare feedforward and recurrent neural network models and find that only recurrent models can account for the dynamic transformations of representations among multiple regions of visual cortex.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1905544116

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Artificial vision models such as deep convolutional neural networks are already both highly successful and often claimed to be good models of human vision.

    “artificial vision models such as deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs), are already both highly successful and often claimed to be good models of human vision (Kietzmann et al. 2019, Lindsay 2021, Mehrer et al. 2021, Zhuang et al. 2021).”

    From Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness (2023) · cites this paper as Kietzmann et al. 2019

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 68 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [36]McClure P., Kriegeskorte N., Representational distance learning for deep neural networks. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 10, 131 (2016). 28082889 PMC5187453
  2. [47]Mehrer J., Kietzmann T. C., Kriegeskorte N., “ Deep neural networks trained on ecologically relevant categories better explain human IT” in Cognitive Computational Neuroscience Meeting (Cognitive Computational Neuroscience, 2017), pp. 1– 2.
  3. [60]Kingma D. P., Ba J. L., Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv:1412.6980 (30 January 2017). · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kietzmann, T. C., Spoerer, C. J., Sörensen, L. K. A., Cichy, R. M., Hauk, O., & Kriegeskorte, N.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
  • Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Kietzmann, Tim C.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2019-10-07
Volume
116
Issue
43
Pages
21854-21863
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2979357328
Cited by
406
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 66 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 66 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 5
FWCI
26.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Refubium (Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Universitätsbibliothek der FU Berlin Hochschulschriftenstelle u. Dokumentenserver
  • Apollo
Funders
  • European Commission (604102, 261352)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • Medical Research Council (MC-A060- 5PR20)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
recurrent neural networks, ventral stream, representational dynamics, object recognition, Granger causality, bidirectional information flow, top-down connections
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Adult, Female, Humans, Models, Neurological, Nerve Net, Visual Pathways, Visual Perception, Magnetoencephalography, Feedback, Sensory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review