Cited by 248Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesVisual perception and processing mechanisms

A High-Throughput Screening Approach to Discovering Good Forms of Biologically Inspired Visual Representation

Open access
Pinto, Nicolas, Doukhan, David, DiCarlo, James J., Cox, David D.·2009·PLoS Computational Biology

Abstract

While many models of biological object recognition share a common set of "broad-stroke" properties, the performance of any one model depends strongly on the choice of parameters in a particular instantiation of that model--e.g., the number of units per layer, the size of pooling kernels, exponents in normalization operations, etc. Since the number of such parameters (explicit or implicit) is typically large and the computational cost of evaluating one particular parameter set is high, the space of possible model instantiations goes largely unexplored. Thus, when a model fails to approach the abilities of biological visual systems, we are left uncertain whether this failure is because we are missing a fundamental idea or because the correct "parts" have not been tuned correctly, assembled at sufficient scale, or provided with enough training. Here, we present a high-throughput approach to the exploration of such parameter sets, leveraging recent advances in stream processing hardware (high-end NVIDIA graphic cards and the PlayStation 3's IBM Cell Processor). In analogy to high-throughput screening approaches in molecular biology and genetics, we explored thousands of potential network architectures and parameter instantiations, screening those that show promising object recognition performance for further analysis. We show that this approach can yield significant, reproducible gains in performance across an array of basic object recognition tasks, consistently outperforming a variety of state-of-the-art purpose-built vision systems from the literature. As the scale of available computational power continues to expand, we argue that this approach has the potential to greatly accelerate progress in both artificial vision and our understanding of the computational underpinning of biological vision.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000579

Cites

5 of 5 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

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: 27

  1. [1]Fukushima K 1980 Neocognitron: A self-organizing neural network model for a mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position. Biological Cybernetics 36 193 202 7370364
  2. [3]Riesenhuber M Poggio T 1999 Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neuroscience 2 1019 1025 10526343
  3. [4]Rolls ET Milward T 2000 A Model of Invariant Object Recognition in the Visual System: Learning Rules, Activation Functions, Lateral Inhibition, and Information-Based Performance Measures. Neural Computation 12 2547 2572 11110127
  4. [5]Rolls ET Deco G 2002 Computational neuroscience of vision. Oxford University Press New York
  5. [6]Haykin S 1998 Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation. Prentice Hall PTR Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA
  6. [7]Serre T Wolf L Bileschi S Riesenhuber M Poggio T 2007 Robust object recognition with cortex-like mechanisms. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 29 411 17224612
  7. [8]Mutch J Lowe DG 2008 Object class recognition and localization using sparse features with limited receptive fields. International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV) 80 45 57
  8. [10]Pinto N DiCarlo JJ Cox DD 2008 Establishing Good Benchmarks and Baselines for Face Recognition. European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)
  9. [11]Pinto N Cox DD DiCarlo JJ 2008 Why is Real-World Visual Object Recognition Hard. PLoS Computational Biology 4 e27 18225950 PMC2211529
  10. [12]Pinto N DiCarlo JJ Cox DD 2009 How far can you get with a modern face recognition test set using only simple features? Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference (CVPR)
  11. [16]Owens JD Houston M Luebke D Green S Stone JE 2008 GPU computing. Proceedings of the IEEE 96 879 899
  12. [18]Cox DD Meier P Oertelt N DiCarlo JJ 2005 Breaking position-invariant object recognition. Nature Neuroscience 8 1145 16116453
  13. [19]DiCarlo JJ Cox DD 2007 Untangling invariant object recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11 333 341 17631409
  14. [21]Einhäuser W Hipp J Eggert J Körner E König P 2005 Learning viewpoint invariant object representations using a temporal coherence principle. Biological Cybernetics 93 79 90 16021516
  15. [22]Franzius M Wilbert N Wiskott L 2008 Invariant Object Recognition with Slow Feature Analysis. Proc 18th Intl Conf on Artificial Neural Networks, ICANN'08, Prague 21671784
  16. [23]Li N DiCarlo JJ 2008 Unsupervised Natural Experience Rapidly Alters Invariant Object Representation in Visual Cortex. Science 321 1502 18787171 PMC3307055
  17. [24]Yao H Dan Y 2001 Stimulus Timing-Dependent Plasticity in Cortical Processing of Orientation. Neuron 32 315 323 11684000
  18. [25]Lindholm E Nickolls J Oberman S Montrym J 2008 NVIDIA Tesla: A unified graphics and computing architecture. IEEE Micro 28 39 55
  19. [27]Gross R Matthews I Cohn J Kanade T Baker S 2007 The CMU multi-pose, illumination, and expression (Multi-PIE) face database. Technical report, Tech. rep., Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2007. TR-07-08 PMC2873597 20490373
  20. [28]Fei-Fei L Fergus R Perona P 2004 Learning generative visual models from few training examples: an incremental Bayesian approach tested on 101 object categories. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference (CVPR)
  21. [35]Shamir L 2008 Evaluation of Face Datasets as Tools for Assessing the Performance of Face Recognition Methods. International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV) 79 225 230 PMC2529479 18776952
  22. [37]Bosch A Zisserman A Munoz X 2007 Representing shape with a spatial pyramid kernel. International Conference on Image and Video Retrieval (CIVR)
  23. [39]Berg AC Malik J 2001 Geometric blur and template matching. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference (CVPR)
  24. [41]Cox DD Pinto N Doukhan D Corda B DiCarlo JJ 2008 A high-throughput screening approach to discovering good forms of visual representation. Computational and Systems Neuroscience (COSYNE) PMC2775908 19956750
  25. [42]Deb K 2001 Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms. Wiley
  26. [43]Rutenbar R 1989 Simulated annealing algorithms: An overview. IEEE Circuits and Devices Magazine 5 19 26
  27. [44]Kennedy J Eberhart R 1995 Particle swarm optimization. IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pinto, N., Doukhan, D., DiCarlo, J. J., & Cox, D. D.
Affiliations
  • McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Pinto, Nicolas
  • Cox, David D.
Venue
PLoS Computational Biology
Published
2009-11-26
Volume
5
Issue
11
Pages
e1000579
ISSN
  • 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7358
OpenAlex
W2144161366
Cited by
248
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 12
FWCI
13.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PLoS eBooks
Funders
  • McKnight Foundation
  • Nvidia
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Rowland Institute at Harvard
  • National Eye Institute (R01EY014970)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
high-throughput screening, biologically inspired vision, object recognition, parameter space exploration, neural architecture search, convolutional neural networks, NVIDIA GPUs, biological visual system, computational neuroscience
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Artificial Intelligence, Computer Simulation, Humans, Models, Neurological, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Visual Cortex, Biomimetics

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