Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

David L. Sheinberg

dblp:82/8265 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Trustworthy machine learning · 36% Language models and text generation · 36% Image recognition and object detection · 11%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › alignment
human alignment
0.712023
Computing a human-like reaction time metric from stable recurrent vision models · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.712023
Computing a human-like reaction time metric from stable recurrent vision models · NeurIPS 2023
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking
action recognition
0.212013
Neural representation of action sequences: how far can a simple snippet-matching model take us? · NIPS 2013
Bioinformatics and computational biology › computational neuroscience › neural coding
neural representation
0.012013
Neural representation of action sequences: how far can a simple snippet-matching model take us? · NIPS 2013

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

subjective logic theory · 0.7evidence accumulation · 0.7snippet-matching model · 0.3linear weighted sum · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Computing a human-like reaction time metric from stable recurrent vision models
abstract
The meteoric rise in the adoption of deep neural networks as computational models of vision has inspired efforts to ``align” these models with humans. One dimension of interest for alignment includes behavioral choices, but moving beyond characterizing choice patterns to capturing temporal aspects of visual decision-making has been challenging. Here, we sketch a general-purpose methodology to construct computational accounts of reaction times from a stimulus-computable, task-optimized model. Specifically, we introduce a novel metric leveraging insights from subjective logic theory summarizing evidence accumulation in recurrent vision models. We demonstrate that our metric aligns with patterns of human reaction times for stimulus manipulations across four disparate visual decision-making tasks spanning perceptual grouping, mental simulation, and scene categorization. This work paves the way for exploring the temporal alignment of model and human visual strategies in the context of various other cognitive tasks toward generating testable hypotheses for neuroscience. Links to the code and data can be found on the project page: https://serre-lab.github.io/rnn_rts_site/.
Lore Goetschalckx, Lakshmi Narasimhan Govindarajan, Alekh Karkada Ashok, Aarit Ahuja, David L. Sheinberg, Thomas Serre
NeurIPS5
2013 Neural representation of action sequences: how far can a simple snippet-matching model take us?
abstract
The macaque Superior Temporal Sulcus (STS) is a brain area that receives and integrates inputs from both the ventral and dorsal visual processing streams (thought to specialize in form and motion processing respectively). For the processing of articulated actions, prior work has shown that even a small population of STS neurons contains sufficient information for the decoding of actor invariant to action, action invariant to actor, as well as the specific conjunction of actor and action. This paper addresses two questions. First, what are the invariance properties of individual neural representations (rather than the population representation) in STS? Second, what are the neural encoding mechanisms that can produce such individual neural representations from streams of pixel images? We find that a baseline model, one that simply computes a linear weighted sum of ventral and dorsal responses to short action “snippets”, produces surprisingly good fits to the neural data. Interestingly, even using inputs from a single stream, both actor-invariance and action-invariance can be produced simply by having different linear weights.
Cheston Tan, Jedediah M. Singer, Thomas Serre, David L. Sheinberg, Tomaso A. Poggio
NIPS4