Emergence of Visual Center-Periphery Spatial Organization in Deep Convolutional Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research at the intersection of computer vision and neuroscience has revealed hierarchical correspondence between layers of deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) and cascade of regions along human ventral visual cortex. Recently, studies have uncovered emergence of human interpretable concepts within DCNNs layers trained to identify visual objects and scenes. Here, we asked whether an artificial neural network (with convolutional structure) trained for visual categorization would demonstrate spatial correspondences with human brain regions showing central/peripheral biases. Using representational similarity analysis, we compared activations of convolutional layers of a DCNN trained for object and scene categorization with neural representations in human brain visual regions. Results reveal a brain-like topographical organization in the layers of the DCNN, such that activations of layer-units with central-bias were associated with brain regions with foveal tendencies (e.g. fusiform gyrus), and activations of layer-units with selectivity for image backgrounds were associated with cortical regions showing peripheral preference (e.g. parahippocampal cortex). The emergence of a categorical topographical correspondence between DCNNs and brain regions suggests these models are a good approximation of the perceptual representation generated by biological neural networks.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".