↓ Skip to main content

A conceptual framework of computations in mid-level vision

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A conceptual framework of computations in mid-level vision
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, December 2014
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2014.00158
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonas Kubilius, Johan Wagemans, Hans P. Op de Beeck

Abstract

If a picture is worth a thousand words, as an English idiom goes, what should those words-or, rather, descriptors-capture? What format of image representation would be sufficiently rich if we were to reconstruct the essence of images from their descriptors? In this paper, we set out to develop a conceptual framework that would be: (i) biologically plausible in order to provide a better mechanistic understanding of our visual system; (ii) sufficiently robust to apply in practice on realistic images; and (iii) able to tap into underlying structure of our visual world. We bring forward three key ideas. First, we argue that surface-based representations are constructed based on feature inference from the input in the intermediate processing layers of the visual system. Such representations are computed in a largely pre-semantic (prior to categorization) and pre-attentive manner using multiple cues (orientation, color, polarity, variation in orientation, and so on), and explicitly retain configural relations between features. The constructed surfaces may be partially overlapping to compensate for occlusions and are ordered in depth (figure-ground organization). Second, we propose that such intermediate representations could be formed by a hierarchical computation of similarity between features in local image patches and pooling of highly-similar units, and reestimated via recurrent loops according to the task demands. Finally, we suggest to use datasets composed of realistically rendered artificial objects and surfaces in order to better understand a model's behavior and its limitations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Unknown 56 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 24%
Student > Master 9 16%
Professor 3 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 33%
Neuroscience 9 16%
Computer Science 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 11 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 February 2015.
All research outputs
#12,908,293
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#484
of 1,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,685
of 356,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#8
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 356,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.