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

Lalit Pandey

dblp:237/1453 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0009-0000-0738-8747ORCID · reported

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author · 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 · 44% 3D vision · 44% Image recognition and object detection · 13%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning › self-supervised representation learning › self-supervised visual representation learning
self-supervised vision transformer
0.712023
Are Vision Transformers More Data Hungry Than Newborn Visual Systems? · NeurIPS 2023
Computer vision › 3D vision › 3d object recognition
view-invariant object representation
0.712023
Are Vision Transformers More Data Hungry Than Newborn Visual Systems? · NeurIPS 2023
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
object recognition
0.212023
Are Vision Transformers More Data Hungry Than Newborn Visual Systems? · NeurIPS 2023
Bioinformatics and computational biology
computational neuroscience
0.212023
Are Vision Transformers More Data Hungry Than Newborn Visual Systems? · NeurIPS 2023

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

self-supervised learning · 1.3controlled-rearing experiment · 1.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Parallel development of object recognition in newborn chicks and deep neural networks
abstract
How do newborns learn to see? We propose that visual systems are space-time fitters, meaning visual development can be understood as a blind fitting process (akin to evolution) in which visual systems gradually adapt to the spatiotemporal data distributions in the newborn's environment. To test whether space-time fitting is a viable theory for learning how to see, we performed parallel controlled-rearing experiments on newborn chicks and deep neural networks (DNNs), including CNNs and transformers. First, we raised newborn chicks in impoverished environments containing a single object, then simulated those environments in a video game engine. Second, we recorded first-person images from agents moving through the virtual animal chambers and used those images to train DNNs. Third, we compared the viewpoint-invariant object recognition performance of the chicks and DNNs. When DNNs received the same visual diet (training data) as chicks, the models developed common object recognition skills as chicks. DNNs that used time as a teaching signal-space-time fitters-also showed common patterns of successes and failures across the test viewpoints as chicks. Thus, DNNs can learn object recognition in the same impoverished environments as newborn animals. We argue that space-time fitters can serve as formal scientific models of newborn visual systems, providing image-computable models for studying how newborns learn to see from raw visual experiences.
Lalit Pandey, Donsuk Lee, Samantha M. W. Wood, Justin N. Wood
PLoS Comput. Biol.1
2023 Are Vision Transformers More Data Hungry Than Newborn Visual Systems?
abstract
Vision transformers (ViTs) are top-performing models on many computer vision benchmarks and can accurately predict human behavior on object recognition tasks. However, researchers question the value of using ViTs as models of biological learning because ViTs are thought to be more “data hungry” than brains, with ViTs requiring more training data than brains to reach similar levels of performance. To test this assumption, we directly compared the learning abilities of ViTs and animals, by performing parallel controlled-rearing experiments on ViTs and newborn chicks. We first raised chicks in impoverished visual environments containing a single object, then simulated the training data available in those environments by building virtual animal chambers in a video game engine. We recorded the first-person images acquired by agents moving through the virtual chambers and used those images to train self-supervised ViTs that leverage time as a teaching signal, akin to biological visual systems. When ViTs were trained “through the eyes” of newborn chicks, the ViTs solved the same view-invariant object recognition tasks as the chicks. Thus, ViTs were not more data hungry than newborn chicks: both learned view-invariant object representations in impoverished visual environments. The flexible and generic attention-based learning mechanism in ViTs—combined with the embodied data streams available to newborn animals—appears sufficient to drive the development of animal-like object recognition.
Lalit Pandey, Samantha M. W. Wood, Justin N. Wood
NeurIPS1