Testing Viewpoint Invariance in the Neural Representation of Faces: An MEG Study

  • Michael P. Ewbank
  • William A. P. Smith
  • Edwin R. Hancock
  • Timothy J. Andrews
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4729)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the extent to which the neural representation of faces in the visual cortex is viewpoint invariant. MEG was used to measure evoked responses to faces during an adaptation paradigm. Using familiar and unfamiliar faces, we compared the amplitude of the M170 response to repeated images of the same face compared to images of different faces. We found a reduction in the M170 amplitude to repeated presentations of the same face image compared to images of different faces when shown from the same viewpoint. To establish if this adaptation to the identity of a face was invariant to changes in viewpoint, we varied the viewing angle of the face within a block. In order to exert strict control over the viewpoint from which the face was viewed, we used 3D models recovered from single images using shape-from-shading. This makes the study unique in its use of techniques from machine vision in order to test human visual processes. We found a reduction in response was no longer evident when images of the same face were shown from different viewpoints. These results imply that the face-selective M170 response either reflects an early stage of face processing or that the computations underlying face recognition depend on a viewpoint-dependent neuronal representation.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bruce, V., Young, A.W.: Understanding face recognition. Br. J. Psychol. 77, 305–327 (1986)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Haxby, J.V., Hoffman, E.A., Gobbini, M.I.: The distributed human neural system for face perception. Trends in Cognitive Science 4, 223–233 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grill-Spector, K., Knouf, N., Kanwisher, K.: The fusiform face area subserves face perception, not generic within-category identification. Nature Neuroscience 7, 555–562 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rotshtein, P., Henson, R.N., Treves, A., Driver, J., Dolan, R.J.: Morphing marilyn into maggie dissociates physical and identity face representations in the brain. Nat. Neurosci. 8, 107–113 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gauthier, I., Tarr, M.J., Moylan, J., Skudlarski, P., Gore, J.C., Anderson, J.W.: The fusiform face area is part of a network that processes faces at the individual level. J. Cogn. Neurosci. (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoffman, E.A., Haxby, J.V.: Distinct representations of eye gaze and identity in the distributed human neural system for face perception. Nat. Neurosci. 3, 80–84 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Allison, T., Puce, A., Spencer, D., McCarthy, G.: Electrophysiological studies of human face perception: I. potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex by face and non-face stimuli. Cerebral Cortex 9, 415–430 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu, J., Harris, A., Kanwisher, N.: Stage of processing in face perception: an meg study. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 910–916 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grill-Spector, K., Henson, R., Martin, A.: Repetition and the brain: neural models of stimulus-specific effects. Trends in Cognitive Science 10, 14–23 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harris, A., Nakayama, K.: Rapid face-selective adaptation of an early extrastriate component in meg. Cerebral Cortex 17, 63–70 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ewbank, M.P., Andrews, T.J.: Size-invariant, but viewpoint-specific adaptation of the n170 potential to faces. In: Proc. 12th Annual Meeting of the Organisation for Human Brain Mapping (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smith, W.A.P., Hancock, E.R.: Recovering facial shape using a statistical model of surface normal direction. IEEE Trans. PAMI 28, 1914–1930 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kovacs, G., Zimmer, M., Banko, E., Harza, I., Antal, A., Vidnyanszky, Z.: Electrophysiological correlates of visual adaptation to faces and body parts in humans. Cereb. Cortex 16, 742–753 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schweinberger, S.R., Huddy, V., Burton, A.M.: N250r: A face-selective brain response to stimulus repetitions. NeuroReport 15, 1501–1505 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henson, R.N., Rylands, A., Ross, E., Vuilleumeir, P., Rugg, M.D.: The effect of repetition lag on electrophysiological and haemodynamic correlates of visual object priming. Neuroimage 21, 1674–1689 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grill-Spector, K., Kushnir, T., Hendler, T., Edelman, S., Itzchak, Y., Malach, R.: Differential processing of objects under various viewing conditions in human lateral occipital complex. Neuron 24, 187–203 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eger, E., Schweinberger, S.R., Dolan, R.J., Henson, R.N.: Familiarity enhances invariance of face-representations in human ventral visual cortex: fmri evidence. NeuroImage 26, 1128–1139 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hancock, P.J.B., Bruce, V., Burton, A.M.: Recognition of unfamiliar faces. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4, 330–337 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Andrews, T.J., Ewbank, M.P.: Distinct representations for facial identity and changeable aspects of faces in the human temporal lobe. NeuroImage 23, 905–913 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wallis, G., Bulthoff, H.: Learning to recognize objects. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3, 22–31 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael P. Ewbank
    • 1
  • William A. P. Smith
    • 2
  • Edwin R. Hancock
    • 2
  • Timothy J. Andrews
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Psychology, The University of YorkUK
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science, The University of YorkUK

Personalised recommendations