Dynamic Representation In the above discussion, both architectures share the idea that the shape needs to be conveyed toward a representation expressed as a fixed set of neurons, which in turn have to be activated for recognition. Stated shortly, the input is made dynamic to move it into its correct slot, a fixed representation. But maybe it is this fixed representation that makes our search for position and scale invariance so awkward. How about making the representation dynamic? For instance, instead of representing the shape by a spatially fixed set of synaptic weights, it may be represented by a set of perpetually active (spiking) neurons in the RM, which would represent the shape in a structurally loose manner. After the shape is placed onto the PM and has triggered a number of waves, those waves in turn would stir up the activity in the RM and both the PM and the RM would transiently establish a strong connection between them, a ‘locked’ state in some sense: one may also term this a recognition by reverberation or attraction. Such dynamics have already been implemented in ‘classical’ neural networks (e.g. (Haykin, 1994) for a review). Our specific proposal here is that they would occur with waves that specifically encode space and that would solve some of the part-shape variability. A dynamic representation could also be of advantage for constructing the loose basic-level object representations we aim at throughout our book (section 2.5).

To what degree this size and position invariance is necessary is also something that has to be explored heuristically. To contrive the optimal architecture, it may be best to develop it with a system that performs saccades or attentional shifts that would bring the object into the ‘exact’ center of the focus.

9.3 Architecture for a Template Approach

In the section on ‘Integration Perspectives’ (9.1), we have listed a number of schemes on how to set the regions (sym-axes) into relation with each other to describe an object, which basically represents a structural description approach as pursued in chapter 5. However, in the end, any type of integration may be too tedious for the rapid association we look for (figure 2). Considering again that the visual system remembers pictures extraordinarily well (chapter 1), one may also ponder the possibility that some sort of template matching is at work in the real visual system. The idea exists since early on, but is often dismissed as too simple (Palmer, 1999). Nontheless, it is this simplicity that could beat any sophisticated integration scheme. With the previously suggested architecture for solving size and position invariance, we have already moved toward some sort of template-matching scheme. We here give one outline on how to start thinking about a template architecture.

Figure 47: Recognition process with broadcast receiver principle. a. Lower cortical areas may perform a region-encoding transformation (T), whose product is sent across higher cortical areas to find the appropriate match (slot S). b. Neuromorphic architecture.

Let us assume that in the initial stages of recognition evolvement a number of transformations take place. These transformations would convert region space into an abstraction like a sym-ax, a set of waves, or a wavelet-like product, which would bear some structural variability independence (see ‘T’ in figure 47a). We imagine that such an abstraction could be stored as a whole. It maybe stored in a slot (‘S’) in a higher area of cortex, where it is appropriate for other associations, like other objects of a specific frame, or a set of motor actions that would be triggered if one intended to act upon the perceived object. Recognition matching would occur by propagation of the abstraction through the cortical medium until its corresponding slot is found. This idea can be classified as an instance of the broadcast receiver principle as it has been proposed by Blum. Blum’s specific idea was

that object properties would be integrated by coincidence of waves; our thinking, in turn, is that visual abstractions of whole objects or structures are propagated across the cortex.

In a neuromorphic system, this propagation process could be mimicked by projecting the output of the transformation maps into the chips containig the abstract representations (figure 47b).

9.4 Basic-Level Representations

In chapter 1 we have mentioned the existence of different category levels (section 1.5, figure 3), but throughout our chapters we have not been specific about the level we were talking about. We have an addendum on that.

Figure 48: More variability in the basic-level category chair. Chairs like the office chair or bar stool are only partially similar to the ‘regular’ chair that we have seen so far in this essay.

As mentioned in section 2.1 already, some basic-level categories possess a high structural variability, others a low variability. Categories with a low variability, like the category book, could be represented by a few regions or possibly by a single, abstract template. Basic-level categories with a high structural variability in contrast, likely require a larger, more diverse representation. Figure 48 should exemplify that point. The chair on the left, labeled as ‘regular’ chair, is the one discussed throughout this book, but chairs show also structures like the right two ones, labeled as office chair and as bar stool. They can be regarded as subordinate categories and are structurally only partially similar to the regular chair. The regular and the office chair share similar regions around the backrest and the seating area. The legs however are completely differently aligned, but share the property of having the ‘legs’ stick out into space. The bar stool is least similar to the other two. Only the bottom regions of the legs share some similarity with those of the regular chair. Given this vari-

ability, it is difficult to imagine that there is a single representational construct for this basic-level category. Rather, the variety of subordinate categories in this category has to be represented by several, distinct structural descriptions or maybe even different templates.

9.5 Recapitulation

In this chapter, we have reflected about how to construct a pure neuromorphic system - one that evolves and represents categories exclusively with networks. We have started by thinking about how to integrate sym-axes. We then have turned towards the recognition aspects of position and size invariance and discussed the pyramidal and contour propagation architecture that may solve these two aspects. We have expressed the intuition that representations may also be dynamic for example consisting of a set of waves. Furthermore, we have considered a template architecture that may store structures as a template, because a structural description scheme could be simply too sophisticated and expensive for rapid associations.

Figure 49: A perceptual representation maybe a collection of waves. Compare again to figure 2.

At this point, it is not clear to us yet, at what level exactly all these aspects and processes should take place in a recognition sytem and whether there is a specific architecture that can solve everything elegantly in a smooth manner. The following chapter can be understood as a step towards that direction. To conclude this chapter, we caricature this view with figure 49 (compare again to figure 2): it should express the thinking that waves can represent perceptual categories in some way.

This page intentionally left blank