Laboratory of Biological Psychology, and
Laboratory of Biological Psychology, and.
J Neurosci. 2019 Aug 14;39(33):6513-6525. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1714-18.2019. Epub 2019 Jun 13.
Recent studies showed agreement between how the human brain and neural networks represent objects, suggesting that we might start to understand the underlying computations. However, we know that the human brain is prone to biases at many perceptual and cognitive levels, often shaped by learning history and evolutionary constraints. Here, we explore one such perceptual phenomenon, perceiving animacy, and use the performance of neural networks as a benchmark. We performed an fMRI study that dissociated object appearance (what an object looks like) from object category (animate or inanimate) by constructing a stimulus set that includes animate objects (e.g., a cow), typical inanimate objects (e.g., a mug), and, crucially, inanimate objects that look like the animate objects (e.g., a cow mug). Behavioral judgments and deep neural networks categorized images mainly by animacy, setting all objects (lookalike and inanimate) apart from the animate ones. In contrast, activity patterns in ventral occipitotemporal cortex (VTC) were better explained by object appearance: animals and lookalikes were similarly represented and separated from the inanimate objects. Furthermore, the appearance of an object interfered with proper object identification, such as failing to signal that a cow mug is a mug. The preference in VTC to represent a lookalike as animate was even present when participants performed a task requiring them to report the lookalikes as inanimate. In conclusion, VTC representations, in contrast to neural networks, fail to represent objects when visual appearance is dissociated from animacy, probably due to a preferred processing of visual features typical of animate objects. How does the brain represent objects that we perceive around us? Recent advances in artificial intelligence have suggested that object categorization and its neural correlates have now been approximated by neural networks. Here, we show that neural networks can predict animacy according to human behavior but do not explain visual cortex representations. In ventral occipitotemporal cortex, neural activity patterns were strongly biased toward object appearance, to the extent that objects with visual features resembling animals were represented closely to real animals and separated from other objects from the same category. This organization that privileges animals and their features over objects might be the result of learning history and evolutionary constraints.
最近的研究表明,人类大脑和神经网络对物体的表示方式存在一致性,这表明我们可能开始理解其潜在的计算过程。然而,我们知道,人类大脑在许多感知和认知层面上容易受到偏见的影响,这些偏见通常是由学习历史和进化约束所塑造的。在这里,我们探讨了一种这样的感知现象,即感知生物性,并使用神经网络的表现作为基准。我们进行了一项 fMRI 研究,通过构建一个刺激集来分离物体的外观(物体的外观)和物体的类别(有生命的或无生命的),这个刺激集包括有生命的物体(例如,一头牛)、典型的无生命的物体(例如,一个杯子),以及至关重要的是,看起来像有生命的物体的无生命物体(例如,一个牛杯子)。行为判断和深度神经网络主要根据生物性对图像进行分类,将所有物体(看起来像和无生命的物体)与有生命的物体区分开来。相比之下,腹侧枕颞皮层(VTC)的活动模式则更好地由物体的外观来解释:动物和看起来像的物体被相似地表示,并与无生命的物体分开。此外,物体的外观会干扰对物体的正确识别,例如无法表明牛杯子是杯子。即使在参与者执行需要将看起来像的物体报告为无生命的任务时,VTC 中对将看起来像的物体表示为有生命的偏好仍然存在。总之,与神经网络相比,当视觉外观与生物性分离时,VTC 的表示无法代表物体,这可能是由于对有生命物体的典型视觉特征的优先处理。我们周围的物体是如何被大脑所代表的?人工智能的最新进展表明,物体分类及其神经相关性现在已经被神经网络所近似。在这里,我们表明,神经网络可以根据人类行为预测生物性,但不能解释视觉皮层的表示。在腹侧枕颞皮层中,神经活动模式强烈偏向于物体的外观,以至于具有类似动物的视觉特征的物体与真实动物紧密相连,并与来自同一类别的其他物体分离。这种将动物及其特征置于物体之上的组织可能是学习历史和进化约束的结果。