title: Good exemplars of natural scene categories elicit clearer patterns than bad exemplars but not greater BOLD activity.
abstract: Within the range of images that we might categorize as a "beach", for example, some will be more representative of that category than others. Here we first confirmed that humans could categorize "good" exemplars better than "bad" exemplars of six scene categories and then explored whether brain regions previously implicated in natural scene categorization showed a similar sensitivity to how well an image exemplifies a category. In a behavioral experiment participants were more accurate and faster at categorizing good than bad exemplars of natural scenes. In an fMRI experiment participants passively viewed blocks of good or bad exemplars from the same six categories. A multi-voxel pattern classifier trained to discriminate among category blocks showed higher decoding accuracy for good than bad exemplars in the PPA, RSC and V1. This difference in decoding accuracy cannot be explained by differences in overall BOLD signal, as average BOLD activity was either equivalent or higher for bad than good scenes in these areas. These results provide further evidence that V1, RSC and the PPA not only contain information relevant for natural scene categorization, but their activity patterns mirror the fundamentally graded nature of human categories. Analysis of the image statistics of our good and bad exemplars shows that variability in low-level features and image structure is higher among bad than good exemplars. A simulation of our neuroimaging experiment suggests that such a difference in variance could account for the observed differences in decoding accuracy. These results are consistent with both low-level models of scene categorization and models that build categories around a prototype.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, United Kingdom. a.torralbo@ucl.ac.uk
authors.forename: Ana
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Torralbo
authors.forename: Dirk B
authors.initials: DB
authors.lastname: Walther
authors.forename: Barry
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Chai
authors.forename: Eamon
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Caddigan
authors.forename: Li
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Fei-Fei
authors.forename: Diane M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Beck
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D004644:Emotions / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D059907:Functional Neuroimaging / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008954:Models, Biological; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual / Q000502:physiology*
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Jul 9;99(14):9596-601
references.pmid: 12077298
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2011 May 18;31(20):7322-33
references.pmid: 21593316
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Sep 23;105(38):14325-9
references.pmid: 18787113
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2009 Aug 26;29(34):10573-81
references.pmid: 19710310
references.citation: Vision Res. 1994 Apr;34(7):885-912
references.pmid: 8160402
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Jun 7;108(23):9661-6
references.pmid: 21593417
references.citation: Nature. 1998 Apr 9;392(6676):598-601
references.pmid: 9560155
references.citation: Nature. 1996 Jun 6;381(6582):520-2
references.pmid: 8632824
references.citation: Neuron. 2003 Mar 6;37(5):865-76
references.pmid: 12628176
references.citation: Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42
references.pmid: 9176953
references.citation: Neuroimage. 1997 Aug;6(2):93-103
references.pmid: 9299383
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2001 Sep;86(3):1398-411
references.pmid: 11535686
references.citation: Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6
references.pmid: 9176952
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 1996 Nov-Dec;6(6):823-9
references.pmid: 8922339
references.citation: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2000 Nov;1(2):91-100
references.pmid: 11252779
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 2009 Mar;58(2):137-76
references.pmid: 18762289
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Aug;8(8):363-70
references.pmid: 15335463
references.citation: Front Neuroinform. 2008 Nov 04;2:4
references.pmid: 19050754
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2004 Oct 13;24(41):8975-85
references.pmid: 15483116
references.citation: Science. 2000 Feb 18;287(5456):1269-72
references.pmid: 10678834
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1969 Jul;81(1):10-5
references.pmid: 5812164
references.citation: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2011 Apr;12(4):217-30
references.pmid: 21415848
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2011 Jan 26;31(4):1333-40
references.pmid: 21273418
references.citation: Perception. 2001;30(6):655-68
references.pmid: 11464555
references.citation: Comput Biomed Res. 1996 Jun;29(3):162-73
references.pmid: 8812068
references.citation: J Vis. 2003;3(6):440-55
references.pmid: 12901715
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2011 Sep 04;14(10):1323-9
references.pmid: 21892156