Cited by 678Face Recognition and PerceptionFace recognition and analysisPrimate Behavior and Ecology

Functional Compartmentalization and Viewpoint Generalization Within the Macaque Face-Processing System

Open access
Freiwald, Winrich A., Tsao, Doris Y.·2010·Science

Abstract

Tuned for Faces: The temporal lobe of macaques' brains contains six patches of face-selective cortex. This observation has prompted systems neuroscientists to ask, why so many and what do they do? Freiwald and Tsao (p. 845 ; see the Perspective by Connor ) targeted four of these regions for single-unit recordings and found that the different face-selective patches in macaques have independent functions. The areas where earliest processing occurred were most sharply tuned for individual views and least sharply tuned for identity. The mid-level area was more sharply tuned for identity, and the highest processing stage was strongly tuned for identity in a strikingly view-invariant way. These results yield fundamental insights into the computational process of object recognition, the functional organization of the brain, and how representations are transformed through processing hierarchies.

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 · 10.1126/science.1194908

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • ML neurons exhibit viewpoint specificity.

    “These three areas are distinguished by their increasingly abstract stimulus preferences: ML, whose neurons exhibit viewpoint specificity; AL, which is characterized by mirror‐symmetric response preferences (i.e., profile‐selective); and AM, which is tuned to view‐independent stimulus identity.”
  • AM is tuned to view-independent stimulus identity.

    “These three areas are distinguished by their increasingly abstract stimulus preferences: ML, whose neurons exhibit viewpoint specificity; AL, which is characterized by mirror‐symmetric response preferences (i.e., profile‐selective); and AM, which is tuned to view‐independent stimulus identity.”
  • AL is characterized by mirror-symmetric response preferences (i.e., profile-selective).

    “These three areas are distinguished by their increasingly abstract stimulus preferences: ML, whose neurons exhibit viewpoint specificity; AL, which is characterized by mirror‐symmetric response preferences (i.e., profile‐selective); and AM, which is tuned to view‐independent stimulus identity.”
  • Retinotopy in the amygdala is unlikely because visual receptive fields in areas that project to the amygdala, e.g., area TE, are large enough to encompass an entire hemifield.

    “Retinotopy is unlikely when considering the gradual expansion of visual receptive fields along the ventral visual pathway [26]; indeed the receptive fields in areas that project to the amygdala, e.g. area TE [27,28], are large enough to encompass an entire hemifield [29-31].”
  • A brain-computational model of face recognition will have to explain the spatial clusters of face-selective units and the selectivities and invariances observed with fMRI and invasive recordings.

    “A brain-computational model of face recognition16 will have to explain the spatial clusters of face-selective units and the selectivities and invariances observed with fMRI17,18 and invasive recordings14,19.”

    From Cognitive computational neuroscience (2018) · cites this paper as [14]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [4]Rolls ET Hum. Neurobiol 1984 3 209 6526707

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Freiwald, W. A., & Tsao, D. Y.
Affiliations
  • Rockefeller University (US)
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
  • Freiwald, Winrich A.
  • Tsao, Doris Y.
Venue
Science
Published
2010-11-05
Volume
330
Issue
6005
Pages
845-851
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2038032054
Cited by
678
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 65 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 33
FWCI
17.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0847798, CAREER)
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  • Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Eye Institute (R01EY019702)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
Keywords
face processing, face-selective regions, viewpoint invariance, viewpoint generalization, macaque, mirror symmetry, functional specialization, primate visual cortex
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain Mapping, Face, Humans, Macaca mulatta, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neurons, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Temporal Lobe, Visual Pathways, Recognition, Psychology, Electrophysiological Phenomena

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