Posterior Inferotemporal Cortex Cells Use Multiple Input Pathways for Shape Encoding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the macaque monkey brain, posterior inferior temporal (PIT) cortex cells contribute to visual object recognition. They receive concurrent inputs from visual areas V4, V3, and V2. We asked how these different anatomical pathways shape PIT response properties by deactivating them while monitoring PIT activity in two male macaques. We found that cooling of V4 or V2|3 did not lead to consistent changes in population excitatory drive; however, population pattern analyses showed that V4-based pathways were more important than V2|3-based pathways. We did not find any image features that predicted decoding accuracy differences between both interventions. Using the HMAX hierarchical model of visual recognition, we found that different groups of simulated “PIT” units with different input histories (lacking “V2|3” or “V4” input) allowed for comparable levels of object-decoding performance and that removing a large fraction of “PIT” activity resulted in similar drops in performance as in the cooling experiments. We conclude that distinct input pathways to PIT relay similar types of shape information, with V1-dependent V4 cells providing more quantitatively useful information for overall encoding than cells in V2 projecting directly to PIT. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Convolutional neural networks are the best models of the visual system, but most emphasize input transformations across a serial hierarchy akin to the primary “ventral stream” (V1 → V2 → V4 → IT). However, the ventral stream also comprises parallel “bypass” pathways: V1 also connects to V4, and V2 to IT. To explore the advantages of mixing long and short pathways in the macaque brain, we used cortical cooling to silence inputs to posterior IT and compared the findings with an HMAX model with parallel pathways.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".