The complementary brain: unifying brain dynamics and modularity

Grossberg, Stephen

doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01464-9

Cited by 251 publications

(167 citation statements)

References 88 publications

(133 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

164

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies, in both perceptual psychophysics and machine vision, support a role for surfaces in the interpretation of visual scenes and the representation of object shape (e.g., Barrow & Tenenbaum, 1981;Binford, 1981;Cunningham, Shipley, & Kellman, 1998;Grossberg, 2000;Grossberg & Swaminathan, 2004;He & Nakayama, 1992, 1995Hummel, 2000;Kellman & Shipley, 1991;Lee & Park, 2002;Leek & Arguin, 2000;Leek, Reppa, & Arguin, 2002, 2003Lehky & Sejnowski, 1988Liu, Collin, & Chaudhuri, 2000;Marr, 1982;Marr & Nishihara, 1978;Nakayama et al, 1995;Nakayama & Shimojo, 1992;Nicholson & Humphrey, 2001;Nishihara, 1981;Pentland, 1989;Potmesil, 1983;Ramachandra, 1988;Sajda & Finkel, 1995;Sanocki, Bowyer, Heath, & Sarkar, 1998;Witkin, 1981). For example, in some studies, it has been shown that observers are better at recognizing gray scale images of objects (which contain information about shading and surface luminosity gradients) than line drawings (Brodie, Wallace, & Sharrat, 1991;Price & Humphreys, 1989;Sanocki et al, 1998)-although line drawings, like those used in the current study, can be sufficient to support rapid stimulus identification (Biederman & Ju, 1988).…”

Section: Surfaces In Shape Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 96%

The Structure of Three-Dimensional Object Representations in Human Vision: Evidence From Whole-Part Matching.

Leek

Reppa²,

Arguin³

2005

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines how the human visual system represents the shapes of 3-dimensional (3D) objects. One long-standing hypothesis is that object shapes are represented in terms of volumetric component parts and their spatial configuration. This hypothesis is examined in 3 experiments using a whole-part matching paradigm in which participants match object parts to whole novel 3D object shapes. Experiments 1 and 2, consistent with volumetric image segmentation, show that whole-part matching is faster for volumetric component parts than for either open or closed nonvolumetric regions of edge contour. However, the results of Experiment 3 show that an equivalent advantage is found for bounded regions of edge contour that correspond to object surfaces. The results are interpreted in terms of a surface-based model of 3D shape representation, which proposes edge-bounded 2-dimensional polygons as basic primitives of surface shape.

show abstract

Section: Surfaces In Shape Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 96%

The Structure of Three-Dimensional Object Representations in Human Vision: Evidence From Whole-Part Matching.

Leek

Reppa²,

Arguin³

2005

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, latter it was found that firing rate of individual neurons cannot represent images of objects or processes extending in time and space [6], therefore, it was concluded, that firing rate faces several problems [110]. First, the inherent activities of isolated neurons can fluctuate within only a narrow dynamic range, whereas the input signal amplitudes can often vary over a much wider dynamic range [111]. The neurons' small dynamic range could hereby make them insensitive to both small and large inputs as a result of noise and saturation, respectively, at the lower and upper extremes of the neurons' dynamic range.…”

Section: Microscopic Level Of Brain Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, interactions across many neurons within a neuronal assembly are needed to preserve information about the relative sizes of inputs to the neurons in the assembly 20 , and thereby overcome noise and saturation [111]. Second, it is generally accepted that the firing rate of an individual neuron contains information about the properties of the activating stimulus.…”

Section: Microscopic Level Of Brain Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural world physical, brain operational, and mind phenomenal space–time

Fingelkurts

Neves

2010

Physics of Life Reviews

161

225

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concepts of space and time are widely developed in physics. However, there is a considerable lack of biologically plausible theoretical frameworks that can demonstrate how space and time dimensions are implemented in the activity of the most complex life-system -the brain with a mind. Brain activity is organized both temporally and spatially, thus representing space-time in the brain. Critical analysis of recent research on the space-time organization of the brain's activity pointed to the existence of so-called operational space-time in the brain. This space-time is limited to the execution of brain operations of differing complexity. During each such brain operation a particular short-term spatio-temporal pattern of integrated activity of different brain areas emerges within related operational space-time. At the same time, to have a fully functional human brain one needs to have a subjective mental experience. Current research on the subjective mental experience offers detailed analysis of space-time organization of the mind. According to this research, subjective mental experience (subjective virtual world) has definitive spatial and temporal properties similar to many physical phenomena. Based on systematic review of the propositions and tenets of brain and mind space-time descriptions, our aim in this review essay is to explore the relations between the two. To be precise, we would like to discuss the hypothesis that via the brain operational space-time the mind subjective space-time is connected to otherwise distant physical space-time reality.Key words: spatial, temporal, consciousness, cognition, operation, architectonics, EEG, field, metastability, physics, coordinative dynamics, self-organization, cortex.

show abstract

“…Cells found in dorsal MST (MST D ) respond to large field stimulus motion. These target tracking and navigation cells are computed using complementary subtractive vs additive operations (Grossberg, 2000;Grossberg, Mingolla, & Pack, 1999;Pack, Grossberg, & Mingolla, 2001).…”

Section: Appendix: Model Equations and Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%