Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

An empirical assay of view-invariant object learning in humans and comparison with baseline image-computable models

View ORCID ProfileMichael J. Lee, View ORCID ProfileJames J. DiCarlo
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.31.522402
Michael J. Lee
1Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Michael J. Lee
James J. DiCarlo
1Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
2McGovern Institute for Brain Research at Massachusetts Institute of Technology
3MIT Quest for Intelligence and Center for Brains, Minds and Machines
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James J. DiCarlo
  • For correspondence: dicarlo@mit.edu
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

How humans learn new visual objects is a longstanding scientific problem. Previous work has led to a diverse collection of models for how it is accomplished, but a current limitation in the field is a lack of empirical benchmarks which can be used to evaluate and compare specific models against each other. Here, we use online psychophysics to measure human behavioral learning trajectories over a set of tasks involving novel 3D objects. Consistent with intuition, these results show that humans generally require very few images (≈ 6) to approach their asymptotic accuracy, find some object discriminations more easy to learn than others, and generalize quite well over a range of image transformations after even one view of each object. We then use those data to develop benchmarks that may be used to evaluate a learning model’s similarity to humans. We make these data and benchmarks publicly available [GitHub], and, to our knowledge, they are currently the largest publicly-available collection of learning-related psychophysics data in humans. Additionally, to serve as baselines for those benchmarks, we implement and test a large number of baseline models (n=1,932), each based on a standard cognitive theory of learning: that humans re-represent images in a fixed, Euclidean space, then learn linear decision boundaries in that space to identify objects in future images. We find some of these baseline models make surprisingly accurate predictions. However, we also find reliable prediction gaps between all baseline models and humans, particularly in the few-shot learning setting.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted January 02, 2023.
Download PDF
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
An empirical assay of view-invariant object learning in humans and comparison with baseline image-computable models
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
An empirical assay of view-invariant object learning in humans and comparison with baseline image-computable models
Michael J. Lee, James J. DiCarlo
bioRxiv 2022.12.31.522402; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.31.522402
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
An empirical assay of view-invariant object learning in humans and comparison with baseline image-computable models
Michael J. Lee, James J. DiCarlo
bioRxiv 2022.12.31.522402; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.31.522402

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Animal Behavior and Cognition
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4859)
  • Biochemistry (10803)
  • Bioengineering (8046)
  • Bioinformatics (27325)
  • Biophysics (13987)
  • Cancer Biology (11130)
  • Cell Biology (16074)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (8792)
  • Ecology (13300)
  • Epidemiology (2067)
  • Evolutionary Biology (17371)
  • Genetics (11690)
  • Genomics (15932)
  • Immunology (11037)
  • Microbiology (26115)
  • Molecular Biology (10657)
  • Neuroscience (56614)
  • Paleontology (420)
  • Pathology (1735)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (3005)
  • Physiology (4552)
  • Plant Biology (9646)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1615)
  • Synthetic Biology (2691)
  • Systems Biology (6979)
  • Zoology (1511)