Distributed Neural Plasticity for Shape Learning in the Human Visual Cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Expertise in recognizing objects in cluttered scenes is a critical skill for our interactions in complex environments and is thought to develop with learning. However, the neural implementation of object learning across stages of visual analysis in the human brain remains largely unknown. Using combined psychophysics and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we show a link between shape-specific learning in cluttered scenes and distributed neuronal plasticity in the human visual cortex. We report stronger fMRI responses for trained than untrained shapes across early and higher visual areas when observers learned to detect low-salience shapes in noisy backgrounds. However, training with high-salience pop-out targets resulted in lower fMRI responses for trained than untrained shapes in higher occipitotemporal areas. These findings suggest that learning of camouflaged shapes is mediated by increasing neural sensitivity across visual areas to bolster target segmentation and feature integration. In contrast, learning of prominent pop-out shapes is mediated by associations at higher occipitotemporal areas that support sparser coding of the critical features for target recognition. We propose that the human brain learns novel objects in complex scenes by reorganizing shape processing across visual areas, while taking advantage of natural image correlations that determine the distinctiveness of target shapes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".