Unsupervised natural experience rapidly alters invariant object representation in visual cortex.
Object recognition is challenging because each object produces myriad retinal images. Responses of neurons from the inferior temporal cortex (IT) are selective to different objects, yet tolerant ("invariant") to changes in object position, scale, and pose. How does the brain construct this neuronal tolerance? We report a form of neuronal learning that suggests the underlying solution. Targeted alteration of the natural temporal contiguity of visual experience caused specific changes in IT position tolerance. This unsupervised temporal slowness learning (UTL) was substantial, increased with experience, and was significant in single IT neurons after just 1 hour. Together with previous theoretical work and human object perception experiments, we speculate that UTL may reflect the mechanism by which the visual stream builds and maintains tolerant object representations.
Li
Nuo
N
McGovern Institute for Brain Research and Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
DiCarlo
James J
JJ
D000818:Animals; D005556:Form Perception; D007858:Learning; D008253:Macaca mulatta; D008297:Male; D008959:Models, Neurological; D009473:Neuronal Plasticity; D009474:Neurons / Q000502:physiology*; D012438:Saccades; D013702:Temporal Lobe / Q000502:physiology*; D014793:Visual Cortex / Q000502:physiology*; D014796:Visual Perception
Vision Res. 1983;23(8):775-85
6623937
J Neurophysiol. 1995 Jan;73(1):218-26
7714567
PLoS Comput Biol. 2007 Jun;3(6):e112
17604445
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jan 30;98(3):1273-6
11158629
Neural Comput. 2002 Apr;14(4):715-70
11936959
Science. 2005 Nov 4;310(5749):863-6
16272124
Nat Neurosci. 2005 Sep;8(9):1145-7
16116453
J Cogn Neurosci. 2002 Feb 15;14(2):187-98
11970785
Exp Brain Res. 1989;76(1):153-64
2753096
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Oct 9;98(21):12239-44
11572946
J Comp Neurol. 2000 Oct 30;426(4):505-18
11027395
Prog Neurobiol. 1997 Feb;51(2):167-94
9247963
Neural Comput. 1991 Summer;3(2):194-200
31167302
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Jul 21;95(15):8981-4
9671790
J Exp Psychol Hum Learn. 1976 Sep;2(5):509-22
1003124
J Neurosci. 1998 May 15;18(10):3870-96
9570816
Percept Psychophys. 1998 Jan;60(1):65-81
9503912
J Neurophysiol. 1998 Jul;80(1):324-30
9658053
Neuron. 2006 Jan 19;49(2):183-9
16423693
Trends Neurosci. 2001 Feb;24(2):113-21
11164942
Perception. 2001;30(6):707-24
11464559
J Neurosci. 2004 Feb 18;24(7):1617-26
14973244
Annu Rev Neurosci. 1996;19:109-39
8833438
Nature. 1988 Oct 27;335(6193):817-20
3185711
J Neurophysiol. 1994 Mar;71(3):1285-8
8201422
Neural Comput. 1997 May 15;9(4):701-20
9161020
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2002 Aug 29;357(1424):1063-72
12217174
Nat Neurosci. 2000 Aug;3(8):814-21
10903575
Spat Vis. 1990;5(2):81-100
2090197
Nature. 2005 Jun 23;435(7045):1102-7
15973409
Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Jul;9(7):329-34
15955722
Nature. 1991 Nov 14;354(6349):152-5
1944594
Nature. 1996 Jun 6;381(6582):520-2
8632824
Trends Cogn Sci. 1999 Jan;3(1):22-31
10234223
Cereb Cortex. 2003 Jan;13(1):90-9
12466220
Nat Neurosci. 2002 Nov;5(11):1210-6
12379864
Annu Rev Neurosci. 1996;19:577-621
8833455
Vision Res. 1995 Jul;35(13):1897-916
7660596
Science. 1997 Jan 10;275(5297):213-5
8985014
Neuron. 2006 Feb 2;49(3):433-45
16446146
Nat Neurosci. 2004 Aug;7(8):880-6
15235606
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2006 Apr;16(2):152-8
16563736
J Neurosci. 1999 Dec 1;19(23):10404-16
10575038