title: Unsupervised natural experience rapidly alters invariant object representation in visual cortex.
abstract: 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.
authors.affiliation: McGovern Institute for Brain Research and Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
authors.forename: Nuo
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: James J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: DiCarlo
mesh_terms: 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
references.citation: Vision Res. 1983;23(8):775-85
references.pmid: 6623937
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1995 Jan;73(1):218-26
references.pmid: 7714567
references.citation: PLoS Comput Biol. 2007 Jun;3(6):e112
references.pmid: 17604445
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jan 30;98(3):1273-6
references.pmid: 11158629
references.citation: Neural Comput. 2002 Apr;14(4):715-70
references.pmid: 11936959
references.citation: Science. 2005 Nov 4;310(5749):863-6
references.pmid: 16272124
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2005 Sep;8(9):1145-7
references.pmid: 16116453
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2002 Feb 15;14(2):187-98
references.pmid: 11970785
references.citation: Exp Brain Res. 1989;76(1):153-64
references.pmid: 2753096
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Oct 9;98(21):12239-44
references.pmid: 11572946
references.citation: J Comp Neurol. 2000 Oct 30;426(4):505-18
references.pmid: 11027395
references.citation: Prog Neurobiol. 1997 Feb;51(2):167-94
references.pmid: 9247963
references.citation: Neural Comput. 1991 Summer;3(2):194-200
references.pmid: 31167302
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Jul 21;95(15):8981-4
references.pmid: 9671790
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Learn. 1976 Sep;2(5):509-22
references.pmid: 1003124
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1998 May 15;18(10):3870-96
references.pmid: 9570816
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1998 Jan;60(1):65-81
references.pmid: 9503912
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1998 Jul;80(1):324-30
references.pmid: 9658053
references.citation: Neuron. 2006 Jan 19;49(2):183-9
references.pmid: 16423693
references.citation: Trends Neurosci. 2001 Feb;24(2):113-21
references.pmid: 11164942
references.citation: Perception. 2001;30(6):707-24
references.pmid: 11464559
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2004 Feb 18;24(7):1617-26
references.pmid: 14973244
references.citation: Annu Rev Neurosci. 1996;19:109-39
references.pmid: 8833438
references.citation: Nature. 1988 Oct 27;335(6193):817-20
references.pmid: 3185711
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1994 Mar;71(3):1285-8
references.pmid: 8201422
references.citation: Neural Comput. 1997 May 15;9(4):701-20
references.pmid: 9161020
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2002 Aug 29;357(1424):1063-72
references.pmid: 12217174
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2000 Aug;3(8):814-21
references.pmid: 10903575
references.citation: Spat Vis. 1990;5(2):81-100
references.pmid: 2090197
references.citation: Nature. 2005 Jun 23;435(7045):1102-7
references.pmid: 15973409
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Jul;9(7):329-34
references.pmid: 15955722
references.citation: Nature. 1991 Nov 14;354(6349):152-5
references.pmid: 1944594
references.citation: Nature. 1996 Jun 6;381(6582):520-2
references.pmid: 8632824
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 1999 Jan;3(1):22-31
references.pmid: 10234223
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 2003 Jan;13(1):90-9
references.pmid: 12466220
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2002 Nov;5(11):1210-6
references.pmid: 12379864
references.citation: Annu Rev Neurosci. 1996;19:577-621
references.pmid: 8833455
references.citation: Vision Res. 1995 Jul;35(13):1897-916
references.pmid: 7660596
references.citation: Science. 1997 Jan 10;275(5297):213-5
references.pmid: 8985014
references.citation: Neuron. 2006 Feb 2;49(3):433-45
references.pmid: 16446146
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2004 Aug;7(8):880-6
references.pmid: 15235606
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2006 Apr;16(2):152-8
references.pmid: 16563736
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1999 Dec 1;19(23):10404-16
references.pmid: 10575038