Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are increasingly used to model human vision due to their high object categorization capabilities and general correspondence with human brain responses. Here we evaluate the performance of 14 different CNNs compared with human fMRI responses to natural and artificial images using representational similarity analysis. Despite the presence of some CNN-brain correspondence and CNNs’ impressive ability to fully capture lower level visual representation of real-world objects, we show that CNNs do not fully capture higher level visual representations of real-world objects, nor those of artificial objects, either at lower or higher levels of visual representations. The latter is particularly critical, as the processing of both real-world and artificial visual stimuli engages the same neural circuits. We report similar results regardless of differences in CNN architecture, training, or the presence of recurrent processing. This indicates some fundamental differences exist in how the brain and CNNs represent visual information.

Recent studies have challenged the ventral/"what" and dorsal/"where" two-visual-processing-pathway view by showing the existence of "what" and "where" information in both pathways. Is the two-pathway distinction still valid? Here, we examined how goal-directed visual information processing may differentially impact visual representations in these two pathways. Using fMRI and multivariate pattern analysis, in three experiments on human participants (57% females), by manipulating whether color or shape was task-relevant and how they were conjoined, we examined shape-based object category decoding in occipitotemporal and parietal regions. We found that object category representations in all the regions examined were influenced by whether or not object shape was task-relevant. This task effect, however, tended to decrease as task-relevant and irrelevant features were more integrated, reflecting the well-known object-based feature encoding. Interestingly, task relevance played a relatively minor role in driving the representational structures of early visual and ventral object regions. They were driven predominantly by variations in object shapes. In contrast, the effect of task was much greater in dorsal than ventral regions, with object category and task relevance both contributing significantly to the representational structures of the dorsal regions. These results showed that, whereas visual representations in the ventral pathway are more invariant and reflect "what an object is," those in the dorsal pathway are more adaptive and reflect "what we do with it." Thus, despite the existence of "what" and "where" information in both visual processing pathways, the two pathways may still differ fundamentally in their roles in visual information representation.

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a popular method for in vivo neuroimaging. Modern fMRI sequences are often weighted towards the blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) signal, which is closely linked to neuronal activity (Logothetis, 2002). This weighting is achieved by tuning several parameters to increase the BOLD-weighted signal contrast. One such parameter is "TE," or echo time. TE is the amount of time elapsed between when protons are excited (the MRI signal source) and measured. Although the total measured signal magnitude decays with echo time, BOLD sensitivity increases (Silvennoinen et al., 2003). The optimal TE maximizes the BOLD signal weighting based on a number of factors, including several MRI scanner parameters (e.g., field strength), imaged tissue composition (e.g., grey vs. white matter), and proximity to air-tissue boundaries.

No abstract

Understanding object representations requires a broad, comprehensive sampling of the objects in our visual world with dense measurements of brain activity and behavior. Here we present THINGS-data, a multimodal collection of large-scale neuroimaging and behavioral datasets in humans, comprising densely-sampled functional MRI and magnetoencephalographic recordings, as well as 4.70 million similarity judgments in response to thousands of photographic images for up to 1,854 object concepts. THINGS-data is unique in its breadth of richly-annotated objects, allowing for testing countless hypotheses at scale while assessing the reproducibility of previous findings. Beyond the unique insights promised by each individual dataset, the multimodality of THINGS-data allows combining datasets for a much broader view into object processing than previously possible. Our analyses demonstrate the high quality of the datasets and provide five examples of hypothesis-driven and data-driven applications. THINGS-data constitutes the core public release of the THINGS initiative (https://things-initiative.org) for bridging the gap between disciplines and the advancement of cognitive neuroscience.