title: Invariance of visual operations at the level of receptive fields.
abstract: The brain is able to maintain a stable perception although the visual stimuli vary substantially on the retina due to geometric transformations and lighting variations in the environment. This paper presents a theory for achieving basic invariance properties already at the level of receptive fields. Specifically, the presented framework comprises (i) local scaling transformations caused by objects of different size and at different distances to the observer, (ii) locally linearized image deformations caused by variations in the viewing direction in relation to the object, (iii) locally linearized relative motions between the object and the observer and (iv) local multiplicative intensity transformations caused by illumination variations. The receptive field model can be derived by necessity from symmetry properties of the environment and leads to predictions about receptive field profiles in good agreement with receptive field profiles measured by cell recordings in mammalian vision. Indeed, the receptive field profiles in the retina, LGN and V1 are close to ideal to what is motivated by the idealized requirements. By complementing receptive field measurements with selection mechanisms over the parameters in the receptive field families, it is shown how true invariance of receptive field responses can be obtained under scaling transformations, affine transformations and Galilean transformations. Thereby, the framework provides a mathematically well-founded and biologically plausible model for how basic invariance properties can be achieved already at the level of receptive fields and support invariant recognition of objects and events under variations in viewpoint, retinal size, object motion and illumination. The theory can explain the different shapes of receptive field profiles found in biological vision, which are tuned to different sizes and orientations in the image domain as well as to different image velocities in space-time, from a requirement that the visual system should be invariant to the natural types of image transformations that occur in its environment.
authors.affiliation: Department of Computational Biology, School of Computer Science and Communication, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. tony@csc.kth.se
authors.forename: Tony
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Lindeberg
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D006801:Humans; D008954:Models, Biological; D010775:Photic Stimulation; D013028:Space Perception / Q000502:physiology; D014794:Visual Fields; D014795:Visual Pathways / Q000502:physiology; D014796:Visual Perception / Q000502:physiology*
references.citation: Biol Cybern. 2008 Jan;98(1):33-48
references.pmid: 18008082
references.citation: Network. 1998 May;9(2):219-34
references.pmid: 9861987
references.citation: Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):1230-3
references.pmid: 22023743
references.citation: Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:167-92
references.pmid: 17705683
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1995 Jan;73(1):218-26
references.pmid: 7714567
references.citation: Vision Res. 2000;40(5):473-84
references.pmid: 10820606
references.citation: Curr Biol. 1995 May 1;5(5):552-63
references.pmid: 7583105
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1993 Jan;69(1):19-39
references.pmid: 8433131
references.citation: Annu Rev Neurosci. 1998;21:47-74
references.pmid: 9530491
references.citation: Brain Res. 1985 Oct 28;346(1):146-50
references.pmid: 4052761
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2002 Sep;88(3):1128-35
references.pmid: 12205134
references.citation: PLoS Comput Biol. 2012;8(3):e1002372
references.pmid: 22396629
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 1998 Sep;8(6):510-23
references.pmid: 9758214
references.citation: IEEE Trans Image Process. 2000;9(12):2027-42
references.pmid: 18262941
references.citation: Vision Res. 1996 Sep;36(17):2759-70
references.pmid: 8917763
references.citation: J Physiol. 1962 Jan;160:106-54
references.pmid: 14449617
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2000 Aug;3(8):814-21
references.pmid: 10903575
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2005 Nov 16;25(46):10577-97
references.pmid: 16291931
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1987 Dec;58(6):1187-211
references.pmid: 3437330
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2010 Jun;20(3):389-95
references.pmid: 20434327
references.citation: Nature. 2005 Jun 23;435(7045):1102-7
references.pmid: 15973409
references.citation: Neural Comput. 2005 Jan;17(1):47-73
references.pmid: 15563747
references.citation: Nature. 2001 May 10;411(6834):193-5
references.pmid: 11346795
references.citation: J Gen Physiol. 2002 Feb;119(2):125-8
references.pmid: 11815663
references.citation: Annu Rev Neurosci. 2001;24:1193-216
references.pmid: 11520932
references.citation: Biol Cybern. 1988;58(3):163-71
references.pmid: 3358951
references.citation: Spat Vis. 2001;14(3-4):261-319
references.pmid: 11817740
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Aug;11(8):333-41
references.pmid: 17631409
references.citation: Front Comput Neurosci. 2009 Feb 17;3:3
references.pmid: 19242556
references.citation: Biol Cybern. 1984;50(5):363-70
references.pmid: 6477978
references.citation: Science. 2005 Nov 4;310(5749):863-6
references.pmid: 16272124
references.citation: Neural Comput. 2007 Oct;19(10):2665-93
references.pmid: 17716007
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1993 Nov;13(11):4700-19
references.pmid: 8229193
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2003 Aug;13(4):440-5
references.pmid: 12965291
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 1999 Nov;2(11):1019-25
references.pmid: 10526343
references.citation: Spat Vis. 1987;2(4):273-93
references.pmid: 3154952
references.citation: Curr Biol. 1998 Feb 12;8(4):R135-9
references.pmid: 9501978
references.citation: Psychol Res. 1990;52(2-3):122-7
references.pmid: 2281124
references.citation: Nature. 1996 Jun 13;381(6583):607-9
references.pmid: 8637596
references.citation: J Opt Soc Am A. 1990 Aug;7(8):1362-73
references.pmid: 2398445
references.citation: IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2005 Aug;27(8):1265-78
references.pmid: 16119265
references.citation: Science. 1999 Nov 19;286(5444):1552-4
references.pmid: 10567260
references.citation: Exp Brain Res. 1989;75(1):53-64
references.pmid: 2707356
references.citation: J Physiol. 1959 Oct;148:574-91
references.pmid: 14403679
references.citation: Science. 2010 Nov 19;330(6007):1113-6
references.pmid: 21051599
references.citation: Vision Res. 1965 Dec;5(11):583-601
references.pmid: 5862581
references.citation: J Opt Soc Am. 1980 Nov;70(11):1297-300
references.pmid: 7463179
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1987 Dec;58(6):1233-58
references.pmid: 3437332
references.citation: Vision Res. 1992 Dec;32(12):2385-400
references.pmid: 1288015
references.citation: Behav Processes. 1994 Dec;33(1-2):113-38
references.pmid: 24925242
references.citation: J Physiol Paris. 2003 Mar-May;97(2-3):265-309
references.pmid: 14766146
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1995 Aug;15(8):5448-65
references.pmid: 7643194
references.citation: J Opt Soc Am A. 1987 Dec;4(12):2379-94
references.pmid: 3430225
references.citation: J Comput Neurosci. 2000 Jan-Feb;8(1):51-63
references.pmid: 10798499
references.citation: Biol Cybern. 1987;55(6):367-75
references.pmid: 3567240
references.citation: Trends Neurosci. 1995 Oct;18(10):451-8
references.pmid: 8545912
references.citation: Front Comput Neurosci. 2009 Feb 18;3:1
references.pmid: 19255631
references.citation: Spat Vis. 2001;14(3-4):321-89
references.pmid: 11817741
references.citation: Vision Res. 1994 Jan;34(2):191-5
references.pmid: 8116278
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1997 Aug;7(4):514-22
references.pmid: 9287203
references.citation: Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2002 Nov;66(5 Pt 1):051917
references.pmid: 12513533