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

George Alvarez

dblp:84/7314 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 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
1 paper
Representation and self-supervised learning · 77% 3D vision · 23%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation analysis
representational similarity analysis
0.512021
Neural Regression, Representational Similarity, Model Zoology & Neural Taskonomy at Scale in Rodent Visual Cortex · NeurIPS 2021
Bioinformatics and computational biology
computational neuroscience
0.512021
Neural Regression, Representational Similarity, Model Zoology & Neural Taskonomy at Scale in Rodent Visual Cortex · NeurIPS 2021
Computer vision › 3D vision › biological vision modeling
visual cortex modeling
0.112021
Neural Regression, Representational Similarity, Model Zoology & Neural Taskonomy at Scale in Rodent Visual Cortex · NeurIPS 2021

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

representational similarity analysis · 1.0neural regression · 1.0benchmarking · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 Neural Regression, Representational Similarity, Model Zoology & Neural Taskonomy at Scale in Rodent Visual Cortex
abstract
How well do deep neural networks fare as models of mouse visual cortex? A majority of research to date suggests results far more mixed than those produced in the modeling of primate visual cortex. Here, we perform a large-scale benchmarking of dozens of deep neural network models in mouse visual cortex with both representational similarity analysis and neural regression. Using the Allen Brain Observatory's 2-photon calcium-imaging dataset of activity in over 6,000 reliable rodent visual cortical neurons recorded in response to natural scenes, we replicate previous findings and resolve previous discrepancies, ultimately demonstrating that modern neural networks can in fact be used to explain activity in the mouse visual cortex to a more reasonable degree than previously suggested. Using our benchmark as an atlas, we offer preliminary answers to overarching questions about levels of analysis (e.g. do models that better predict the representations of individual neurons also predict representational similarity across neural populations?); questions about the properties of models that best predict the visual system overall (e.g. is convolution or category-supervision necessary to better predict neural activity?); and questions about the mapping between biological and artificial representations (e.g. does the information processing hierarchy in deep nets match the anatomical hierarchy of mouse visual cortex?). Along the way, we catalogue a number of models (including vision transformers, MLP-Mixers, normalization free networks, Taskonomy encoders and self-supervised models) outside the traditional circuit of convolutional object recognition. Taken together, our results provide a reference point for future ventures in the deep neural network modeling of mouse visual cortex, hinting at novel combinations of mapping method, architecture, and task to more fully characterize the computational motifs of visual representation in a species so central to neuroscience, but with a perceptual physiology and ecology markedly different from the ones we study in primates.
Colin Conwell, David Mayo, Andrei Barbu, Michael A. Buice, George Alvarez, Boris Katz
NeurIPS5