Gaze shifts in humans serve to direct high-resolution vision provided by the fovea towards areas in the environment. Gaze can be considered a proxy for attention or indicator of the relative importance of different parts of the environment. In this talk, we discuss the development of generative models of human gaze in response to visual input. We discuss how such models can be learned, both using supervised learning and using implicit feedback as an agent interacts with the environment, the latter being more plausible in biological agents. We also discuss two ways such models can be used. First, they can be used to improve the performance of artificial autonomous systems, in applications such as autonomous navigation. Second, because these models are contingent on the human’s task, goals, and/or state in the context of the environment, observations of gaze can be used to infer information about user intent. This information can be used to improve human-machine and human robot interaction, by making interfaces more anticipative. We discuss example applications in gaze-typing, robotic tele-operation and human-robot interaction.

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.

A high-resolution central fovea is a prominent design feature of human vision. But how important is the fovea for information processing and gaze guidance in everyday visual-cognitive tasks? Following on from classic findings for sentence reading, I will present key results from a series of eye-tracking experiments in which observers had to search for a target object within static or dynamic images of real-world scenes. Gaze-contingent scotomas were used to selectively deny information processing in the fovea, parafovea, or periphery. Overall, the results suggest that foveal vision is less important and peripheral vision is more important for scene perception and search than previously thought. The importance of foveal vision was found to depend on the specific requirements of the task. Moreover, the data support a central-peripheral dichotomy in which peripheral vision selects and central vision recognizes.

Human vision relies on rapid eye movements (saccades) 2-3 times every second to bring peripheral targets to central foveal vision for high resolution inspection. This rapid sampling of the world defines the perception-action cycle of natural vision and profoundly impacts our perception. Marmosets have similar visual processing and eye movements as humans, including a fovea that supports high-acuity central vision. Here, I present a novel approach developed in my laboratory for investigating the neural mechanisms of visual processing using naturalistic free viewing and simple target foraging paradigms. First, we establish that it is possible to map receptive fields in the marmoset with high precision in visual areas V1 and MT without constraints on fixation of the eyes. Instead, we use an off-line correction for eye position during foraging combined with high resolution eye tracking. This approach allows us to simultaneously map receptive fields, even at the precision of foveal V1 neurons, while also assessing the impact of eye movements on the visual information encoded. We find that the visual information encoded by neurons varies dramatically across the saccade to fixation cycle, with most information localized to brief post-saccadic transients. In a second study we examined if target selection prior to saccades can predictively influence how foveal visual information is subsequently processed in post-saccadic transients. Because every saccade brings a target to the fovea for detailed inspection, we hypothesized that predictive mechanisms might prime foveal populations to process the target. Using neural decoding from laminar arrays placed in foveal regions of area MT, we find that the direction of motion for a fixated target can be predictively read out from foveal activity even before its post-saccadic arrival. These findings highlight the dynamic and predictive nature of visual processing during eye movements and the utility of the marmoset as a model of active vision. Funding sources: NIH EY030998 to JM, Life Sciences Fellowship to JY

Electric Gymnotiform fish live in muddy, shallow waters near the shore – hiding in the dense filamentous roots of floating plants such as Eichornia crassipes (“camalote”). They explore their surroundings by using a series of electric pulses that serve as self emitted carrier of electrosensory signals. This propagates at the speed of light through this spongiform habitat and is barely sensed by the lateral line of predators and prey. The emitted field polarizes the surroundings according to the difference in impedance with water which in turn modifies the profile of transcutaneous currents considered as an electrosensory image. Using this system, pulse Gymnotiformes create an electrosensory bubble where an object’s location, impedance, size and other characteristics are discriminated and probably recognized. Although consciousness is still not well-proven, cognitive functions as volition, attention, and path integration have been shown. Here I will summarize different aspects of the electromotor electrosensory loop of pulse Gymnotiforms. First, I will address how objects are polarized with a stereotyped but temporospatially complex electric field, consisting of brief pulses emitted at regular intervals. This relies on complex electric organs quasi periodically activated through an electromotor coordination system by a pacemaker in the medulla. Second, I will deal with the imaging mechanisms of pulse gymnotiform fish and the presence of two regions in the electrosensory field, a rostral region where the field time course is coherent and field vector direction is constant all along the electric organ discharge and a lateral region where the field time course is site specific and field vector direction describes a stereotyped 3D trajectory. Third, I will describe the electrosensory mosaic and their characteristics. Receptor and primary afferents correspond one to one showing subtypes optimally responding to the time course of the self generated pulse with a characteristic train of spikes. While polarized objects at the rostral region project their electric images on the perioral region where electrosensory receptor density, subtypes and central projection are maximal, the image of objects on the side recruit a single type of scattered receptors. Therefore, the rostral mosaic has been likened to an electrosensory fovea and its receptive field referred to as foveal field. The rest of the mosaic and field are referred to as peripheral. Finally, I will describe ongoing work on early processing structures. I will try to generate an integrated view, including anatomical and functional data obtained in vitro, acute experiments, and unitary recordings in freely moving fish. We have recently shown have shown that these fish tract allo-generated fields and the virtual fields generated by nearby objects in the presence of self-generated fields to explore the nearby environment. These data together with the presence of a multimodal receptor mosaic at the cutaneous surface particularly surrounding the mouth and an important role of proprioception in early sensory processing suggests the hypothesis that the active electrosensory system is part of a multimodal haptic sense.

Visual attention selects only a tiny fraction of visual input information for further processing. Selection starts in the primary visual cortex (V1), which creates a bottom-up saliency map to guide the fovea to selected visual locations via gaze shifts. This motivates a new framework that views vision as consisting of encoding, selection, and decoding stages, placing selection on center stage. It suggests a massive loss of non-selected information from V1 downstream along the visual pathway. Hence, feedback from downstream visual cortical areas to V1 for better decoding (recognition), through analysis-by- synthesis, should query for additional information and be mainly directed at the foveal region. Accordingly, non-foveal vision is not only poorer in spatial resolution, but also more susceptible to many illusions.