Seminars

Despite her still poor visual acuity and minimal visual experience, a 2-3 month old baby will reliably respond to facial expressions, smiling back at her caretaker or older sibling. But what if that same baby had been deprived of her early visual experience? Will she be able to appropriately respond to seemingly mundane interactions, such as a peer’s facial expression, if she begins seeing at the age of 10? My work is part of Project Prakash, a dual humanitarian/scientific mission to identify and treat curably blind children in India and then study how their brain learns to make sense of the visual world when their visual journey begins late in life. In my talk, I will give a brief overview of Project Prakash, and present findings from one of my primary lines of research: plasticity of face perception with late sight onset. Specifically, I will discuss a mixed methods effort to probe and explain the differential windows of plasticity that we find across different aspects of distributed face recognition, from distinguishing a face from a nonface early in the developmental trajectory, to recognizing facial expressions, identifying individuals, and even identifying one’s own caretaker. I will draw connections between our empirical findings and our recent theoretical work hypothesizing that children with late sight onset may suffer persistent face identification difficulties because of the unusual acuity progression they experience relative to typically developing infants. Finally, time permitting, I will point to potential implications of our findings in supporting newly-sighted children as they transition back into society and school, given that their needs and possibilities significantly change upon the introduction of vision into their lives.

Vision and visual cognition is experience-dependent with likely multiple sensitive periods, but we know very little about statistics of visual experience at the scale of everyday life and how they might change with development. By traditional assumptions, the world at the massive scale of daily life presents pretty much the same visual statistics to all perceivers. I will present an overview our work on ego-centric vision showing that this is not the case. The momentary image received at the eye is spatially selective, dependent on the location, posture and behavior of the perceiver. If a perceiver’s location, possible postures and/or preferences for looking at some kinds of scenes over others are constrained, then their sampling of images from the world and thus the visual statistics at the scale of daily life could be biased. I will present evidence with respect to both low-level and higher level visual statistics about the developmental changes in the visual input over the first 18 months post-birth.

I will begin by describing recent research taking a new, model-based approach to perceptual development. This approach uncovers fundamental changes in information processing underlying the protracted development of perception, action, and decision-making in childhood. For example, integration of multiple sensory estimates via reliability-weighted averaging – widely used by adults to improve perception – is often not seen until surprisingly late into childhood, as assessed by both behaviour and neural representations. This approach forms the basis for a newer question: the scope for the nervous system to deploy useful computations (e.g. reliability-weighted averaging) to optimise perception and action using newly-learned sensory signals provided by technology. Our initial model system is augmenting visual depth perception with devices translating distance into auditory or vibro-tactile signals. This problem has immediate applications to people with partial vision loss, but the broader question concerns our scope to use technology to tune in to any signal not available to our native biological receptors. I will describe initial progress on this problem, and our approach to operationalising what it might mean to adopt a new signal comparably to a native sense. This will include testing for its integration (weighted averaging) alongside the native senses, assessing the level at which this integration happens in the brain, and measuring the degree of ‘automaticity’ with which new signals are used, compared with native perception.

The human visual system enables us to recognize objects (e.g., this is a cup) and act upon them (e.g., grasp the cup) with astonishing ease and accuracy. For decades, it was widely accepted that these different functions rely on two separated cortical pathways. The ventral occipitotemporal pathway subserves object recognition, while the dorsal occipitoparietal pathway promotes visually guided actions. In my talk, I will discuss recent evidence from a series of neuropsychological, developmental and neuroimaging studies that were aimed to explore the nature of object representations in the dorsal pathway. The results from these studies highlight the plausible role of the dorsal pathway in object perception and reveal an interplay between shape representations derived by the two pathways. Together, these findings challenge the binary distinction between the two pathways and are consistent with the view that object recognition is not the sole product of ventral pathway computations, but instead relies on a distributed network of regions.

We will start our talk with a short video of our research, illustrating methods (some old and new) and findings that have provided our current understanding of how visual capabilities develop in infancy and early childhood. However, our research poses some outstanding questions. We will briefly discuss three issues, which are linked by a common focus on the development of visual attentional processing: (1) How do recurrent cortical loops contribute to development? Cortical selectivity (e.g., to orientation, motion, and binocular disparity) develops in the early months of life. However, these systems are not purely feedforward but depend on parallel pathways, with recurrent feedback loops playing a critical role. The development of diverse networks, particularly for motion processing, may explain changes in dynamic responses and resolve developmental data obtained with different methodologies. One possible role for these loops is in top-down attentional control of visual processing. (2) Why do hyperopic infants become strabismic (cross-eyes)? Binocular interaction is a particularly sensitive area of development. Standard clinical accounts suppose that long-sighted (hyperopic) refractive errors require accommodative effort, putting stress on the accommodation-convergence link that leads to its breakdown and strabismus. Our large-scale population screening studies of 9-month infants question this: hyperopic infants are at higher risk of strabismus and impaired vision (amblyopia and impaired attention) but these hyperopic infants often under- rather than over-accommodate. This poor accommodation may reflect poor early attention processing, possibly a ‘soft sign’ of subtle cerebral dysfunction. (3) What do many neurodevelopmental disorders have in common? Despite similar cognitive demands, global motion perception is much more impaired than global static form across diverse neurodevelopmental disorders including Down and Williams Syndromes, Fragile-X, Autism, children with premature birth and infants with perinatal brain injury. These deficits in motion processing are associated with deficits in other dorsal stream functions such as visuo-motor co-ordination and attentional control, a cluster we have called ‘dorsal stream vulnerability’. However, our neuroimaging measures related to motion coherence in typically developing children suggest that the critical areas for individual differences in global motion sensitivity are not early motion-processing areas such as V5/MT, but downstream parietal and frontal areas for decision processes on motion signals. Although these brain networks may also underlie attentional and visuo-motor deficits , we still do not know when and how these deficits differ across different disorders and between individual children. Answering these questions provide necessary steps, not only increasing our scientific understanding of human visual brain development, but also in designing appropriate interventions to help each child achieve their full potential.

Learning depends on both the learning mechanism and the regularities in the training material, yet most research on human and machine learning focus on the discovering the mechanisms that underlie powerful learning. I will present evidence from our research focusing on the statistical structure of infant visual learning environments. The findings suggest that the statistical structure of those learning environments are not like those used in laboratory experiments on visual learning, in machine learning, or in our adult assumptions about how teach visual categories. The data derive from our use of head cameras and head-mounted eye trackers capturing FOV experiences in the home as well as in simulated home environments in the laboratory. The participants range from 1 month of age to 24 months. The observed statistical structure offers new insights into the developmental foundations of visual object recognition and suggest a computational rethinking of the problem of visual category formation. The observed environmental statistics also have direct implications for understanding the development of cortical visual systems.