Differential sensitivity of humans and deep networks to the amplitude and phase of shape features

Background: While humans are highly sensitive to global shape information, deep neural networks models (DNNs) trained on ImageNet seem to favor local shape features. In the Fourier descriptor (shape frequency) domain, this manifests as much higher human sensitivity to low shape frequencies. Here we ask how this differential sensitivity depends upon the amplitude vs phase structure of these Fourier shape components. Methods: Human observers (n=68) classified animal silhouettes into nine categories. The shapes were lowpass filtered in the shape frequency domain, over a range of frequency cutoffs, using two filtering methods. In method 1, Fourier components beyond the cutoff were zeroed. In method 2, phases were randomized but amplitudes were preserved. We compared human performance against three representative networks: a convolutional model (ResNet-50) and two transformer models (ViT, SWIN). Results: While switching from filtering method 1 to method 2 resulted in a slight decline in human performance, it led to a significant improvement for the networks. What could explain this improvement? One possibility is that networks were simply confused by the smooth shapes produced by method 1. To assess this possibility, we retested the networks using a third filtering method in which phases were randomized and amplitudes set to normative, uninformative values. While performance improved for these more realistic shape stimuli, for the two transformer models (ViT and SWIN), performance remained below levels seen with method 2, indicating that these networks, unlike humans, are able to make effective use of the amplitude structure of low shape frequency components, even when phases are randomized. Conclusions: While humans use low-frequency shape information more effectively than DNNs, they depend critically on the phase structure of these low-frequency shape components. In contrast, transformer networks exploit the texture-like amplitude structure of these components even when phase is randomized.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Vision
Published
2024-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.1281
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Morphological variations and asymmetry
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.01
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Differential sensitivity of humans and deep networks to the amplitude and phase of shape features

James H. Elder, John Wilder, Nicholas Baker
1 citations
Journal of Vision
Morphological variations and asymmetry
1.01
article

Differential sensitivity of humans and deep networks to the amplitude and phase of shape features

James H. Elder, John Wilder, Nicholas Baker
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Background: While humans are highly sensitive to global shape information, deep neural networks models (DNNs) trained on ImageNet seem to favor local shape features. In the Fourier descriptor (shape frequency) domain, this manifests as much higher human sensitivity to low shape frequencies. Here we ask how this differential sensitivity depends upon the amplitude vs phase structure of these Fourier shape components. Methods: Human observers (n=68) classified animal silhouettes into nine categories. The shapes were lowpass filtered in the shape frequency domain, over a range of frequency cutoffs, using two filtering methods. In method 1, Fourier components beyond the cutoff were zeroed. In method 2, phases were randomized but amplitudes were preserved. We compared human performance against three representative networks: a convolutional model (ResNet-50) and two transformer models (ViT, SWIN). Results: While switching from filtering method 1 to method 2 resulted in a slight decline in human performance, it led to a significant improvement for the networks. What could explain this improvement? One possibility is that networks were simply confused by the smooth shapes produced by method 1. To assess this possibility, we retested the networks using a third filtering method in which phases were randomized and amplitudes set to normative, uninformative values. While performance improved for these more realistic shape stimuli, for the two transformer models (ViT and SWIN), performance remained below levels seen with method 2, indicating that these networks, unlike humans, are able to make effective use of the amplitude structure of low shape frequency components, even when phases are randomized. Conclusions: While humans use low-frequency shape information more effectively than DNNs, they depend critically on the phase structure of these low-frequency shape components. In contrast, transformer networks exploit the texture-like amplitude structure of these components even when phase is randomized.

Journal of VisionVol. 24(10)
York University (CA), Loyola University Chicago (US), Universidad del Noreste (MX)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Morphological variations and asymmetry
1.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.