Vision Science seminars

Note the later time!

In our daily lives, we perceive things as possessing a mind (e.g., people) or lacking one (e.g., shoes). Intriguingly, how much mind we attribute to people can vary, with real people perceived to have more mind than depictions of individuals, such as photographs. Drawing from a range of research methodologies, including naturalistic observation, mobile eye tracking, and surreptitious behavior monitoring, I discuss how various shades of mind influence human attention and behaviour. The findings suggest the novel concept that overt attention (where one looks) in real-life is fundamentally supported by covert attention (attending to someone out of the corner of one's eye).

Detecting the direction of image motion is important for visual navigation, predator avoidance and prey capture, and thus essential for the survival of all animals that have eyes. However, the direction of motion is not explicitly represented at the level of the photoreceptors: it rather needs to be computed by subsequent neural circuits, involving a comparison of the signals from neighboring photoreceptors over time. The exact nature of this process represents a classic example of neural computation and has been a longstanding question in the field. Much progress has been made in recent years in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster by genetically targeting individual neuron types to block, activate or record from them. Our results obtained this way demonstrate that the local direction of motion is computed in two parallel ON and OFF pathways. Within each pathway, a retinotopic array of four direction-selective T4 (ON) and T5 (OFF) cells represents the four Cartesian components of local motion vectors (leftward, rightward, upward, downward). Since none of the presynaptic neurons is directionally selective, direction selectivity first emerges within T4 and T5 cells. Our present research focuses on the cellular and biophysical mechanisms by which the direction of image motion is computed in these neurons.

People largely differ with respect to how well they can learn, memorize, and perceive faces. In this talk, I address two potential sources of variation. One factor might be people’s ability to adapt their perception to the kind of faces they are currently exposed to. For instance, some studies report that those who show larger adaptation effects are also better at performing face learning and memory tasks. Another factor might be people’s sensitivity to perceive fine differences between similar-looking faces. In fact, one study shows that the brain of good performers in a face memory task shows larger neural differences between similar-looking faces. Capitalizing on this body of evidence, I present a behavioural study where I explore the relationship between people’s perceptual adaptability and sensitivity and their individual face processing performance.

Working memory is about the past but for the future. Adopting such a future-focused perspective shifts the narrative of working memory as a limited-capacity storage system to working memory as an anticipatory buffer that helps us prepare for potential and sequential upcoming behaviour. In my talk, I will present a series of our recent studies that have started to reveal emerging principles of a working memory that looks forward – highlighting, amongst others, how selective attention plays a vital role in prioritising internal contents for behaviour, and the bi-directional links between visual working memory and action. These studies show how studying the dynamics of working memory, selective attention, and action together paves way for an integrated understanding of how mind serves behaviour.

Abstract to follow.

Algonauts 2023 was a challenge to create the best model that predicts fMRI brain activity given a seen image. Huze team dominated the competition and released a preprint detailing their process. This journal club meeting will involve open discussion of the paper with Q/A with Huze. Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.01175.pdf Related paper also from Huze that we can discuss: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.14021.pdf

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.

The mapping from the visual field to V1 can be approximated by a log-polar transform. In this domain, scale is a left-right shift, and rotation is an up-down shift. When fed into a standard shift-invariant convolutional network, this provides scale and rotation invariance. However, translation invariance is lost. In our model, this is compensated for by multiple fixations on an object. Due to the high concentration of cones in the fovea with the dropoff of resolution in the periphery, fully 10 degrees of visual angle take up about half of V1, with the remaining 170 degrees (or so) taking up the other half. This layout provides the basis for the central and peripheral pathways. Simulations with this model closely match human performance in scene classification, and competition between the pathways leads to the peripheral pathway being used for this task. Remarkably, in spite of the property of rotation invariance, this model can explain the inverted face effect. We suggest that the standard method of using image coordinates is the wrong prior for models of primate vision.

Note: British 16.15 is the finishing time