A comparison between humans and AI at recognizing objects in unusual poses
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Humans can recognize objects in unusual poses better than deep learning models, given enough time.
- The study compares human and machine performance on object recognition tasks with various object orientations.
- Humans excel at recognizing objects in uncommon poses, but deep networks struggle in these cases.
Plain English Explanation
Humans are remarkably good at recognizing everyday objects, even when those objects are positioned in unusual or unexpected ways. In this study, researchers compared how well humans and deep learning [artificial intelligence] models can identify objects in various orientations.
The researchers found that given enough time, humans significantly outperform deep learning models at recognizing objects in uncommon poses. While deep networks excel at identifying objects in standard, canonical positions, they struggle when the objects are rotated or presented from an unusual angle.
Humans, on the other hand, are able to quickly adapt and recognize objects even when they are not in a typical orientation. This suggests that the human visual system has a remarkable ability to process and understand object shapes and appearances, beyond what is currently possible with state-of-the-art deep learning algorithms.
Technical Explanation
The researchers constructed a dataset of everyday objects (e.g. mugs, chairs, animals) captured from a variety of angles and orientations. They then asked both human participants and deep learning models to rapidly identify the objects shown in these images.
The results showed that when objects were presented in standard, canonical poses, deep learning models outperformed humans in terms of speed and accuracy. However, as the object orientations became more unusual or unfamiliar, human performance remained high while deep network performance declined sharply.
This indicates that while deep networks can excel at recognizing objects in common configurations, they lack the flexibility and generalization ability of the human visual system. Humans are able to draw upon their broader experience and understanding of object shapes and appearances to recognize items even when they are not in typical poses.
The researchers hypothesize that this human advantage stems from our ability to mentally rotate and transform object representations, as well as leverage contextual information and prior knowledge to aid recognition. In contrast, current deep learning models tend to be more rigidly tied to the specific training data they have seen.
Critical Analysis
The study provides valuable insights into the differences between human and machine object recognition capabilities. However, it is important to note that the research was conducted on a limited dataset of everyday objects, and the results may not generalize to more complex or abstract visual recognition tasks.
Additionally, the study does not delve into the underlying mechanisms that enable humans to outperform deep networks on unusual object poses. Further research is needed to fully understand the cognitive processes and representations that allow for this human visual flexibility.
It is also worth considering how these findings might inform the development of more robust and generalizable deep learning models for computer vision. Incorporating human-like strategies for handling novel or unfamiliar visual inputs could be a promising avenue for improving the performance of AI systems in real-world settings.
Conclusion
This research highlights a notable gap between human and machine abilities when it comes to recognizing objects in unusual poses. While deep learning models excel at rapid object identification in standard configurations, humans maintain a significant advantage when objects are presented in uncommon orientations.
These findings underscore the remarkable flexibility and adaptability of the human visual system, and suggest that there is still much to be learned about the underlying mechanisms that enable this capability. By better understanding the principles that guide human visual processing, researchers may be able to develop AI systems that can approach human-level performance on a wider range of object recognition tasks.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
A comparison between humans and AI at recognizing objects in unusual poses
Netta Ollikka, Amro Abbas, Andrea Perin, Markku Kilpelainen, St'ephane Deny
Deep learning is closing the gap with human vision on several object recognition benchmarks. Here we investigate this gap for challenging images where objects are seen in unusual poses. We find that humans excel at recognizing objects in such poses. In contrast, state-of-the-art deep networks for vision (EfficientNet, SWAG, ViT, SWIN, BEiT, ConvNext) and state-of-the-art large vision-language models (Claude 3.5, Gemini 1.5, GPT-4) are systematically brittle on unusual poses, with the exception of Gemini showing excellent robustness in that condition. As we limit image exposure time, human performance degrades to the level of deep networks, suggesting that additional mental processes (requiring additional time) are necessary to identify objects in unusual poses. An analysis of error patterns of humans vs. networks reveals that even time-limited humans are dissimilar to feed-forward deep networks. In conclusion, our comparison reveals that humans and deep networks rely on different mechanisms for recognizing objects in unusual poses. Understanding the nature of the mental processes taking place during extra viewing time may be key to reproduce the robustness of human vision in silico.
Read more8/30/2024
0
Aligning Machine and Human Visual Representations across Abstraction Levels
Lukas Muttenthaler, Klaus Greff, Frieda Born, Bernhard Spitzer, Simon Kornblith, Michael C. Mozer, Klaus-Robert Muller, Thomas Unterthiner, Andrew K. Lampinen
Deep neural networks have achieved success across a wide range of applications, including as models of human behavior in vision tasks. However, neural network training and human learning differ in fundamental ways, and neural networks often fail to generalize as robustly as humans do, raising questions regarding the similarity of their underlying representations. What is missing for modern learning systems to exhibit more human-like behavior? We highlight a key misalignment between vision models and humans: whereas human conceptual knowledge is hierarchically organized from fine- to coarse-scale distinctions, model representations do not accurately capture all these levels of abstraction. To address this misalignment, we first train a teacher model to imitate human judgments, then transfer human-like structure from its representations into pretrained state-of-the-art vision foundation models. These human-aligned models more accurately approximate human behavior and uncertainty across a wide range of similarity tasks, including a new dataset of human judgments spanning multiple levels of semantic abstractions. They also perform better on a diverse set of machine learning tasks, increasing generalization and out-of-distribution robustness. Thus, infusing neural networks with additional human knowledge yields a best-of-both-worlds representation that is both more consistent with human cognition and more practically useful, thus paving the way toward more robust, interpretable, and human-like artificial intelligence systems.
Read more9/17/2024
👨🏫
0
Comparing supervised learning dynamics: Deep neural networks match human data efficiency but show a generalisation lag
Lukas S. Huber, Fred W. Mast, Felix A. Wichmann
Recent research has seen many behavioral comparisons between humans and deep neural networks (DNNs) in the domain of image classification. Often, comparison studies focus on the end-result of the learning process by measuring and comparing the similarities in the representations of object categories once they have been formed. However, the process of how these representations emerge -- that is, the behavioral changes and intermediate stages observed during the acquisition -- is less often directly and empirically compared. Here we report a detailed investigation of the learning dynamics in human observers and various classic and state-of-the-art DNNs. We develop a constrained supervised learning environment to align learning-relevant conditions such as starting point, input modality, available input data and the feedback provided. Across the whole learning process we evaluate and compare how well learned representations can be generalized to previously unseen test data. Comparisons across the entire learning process indicate that DNNs demonstrate a level of data efficiency comparable to human learners, challenging some prevailing assumptions in the field. However, our results also reveal representational differences: while DNNs' learning is characterized by a pronounced generalisation lag, humans appear to immediately acquire generalizable representations without a preliminary phase of learning training set-specific information that is only later transferred to novel data.
Read more7/15/2024
0
Dimensions underlying the representational alignment of deep neural networks with humans
Florian P. Mahner, Lukas Muttenthaler, Umut Guc{c}lu, Martin N. Hebart
Determining the similarities and differences between humans and artificial intelligence is an important goal both in machine learning and cognitive neuroscience. However, similarities in representations only inform us about the degree of alignment, not the factors that determine it. Drawing upon recent developments in cognitive science, we propose a generic framework for yielding comparable representations in humans and deep neural networks (DNN). Applying this framework to humans and a DNN model of natural images revealed a low-dimensional DNN embedding of both visual and semantic dimensions. In contrast to humans, DNNs exhibited a clear dominance of visual over semantic features, indicating divergent strategies for representing images. While in-silico experiments showed seemingly-consistent interpretability of DNN dimensions, a direct comparison between human and DNN representations revealed substantial differences in how they process images. By making representations directly comparable, our results reveal important challenges for representational alignment, offering a means for improving their comparability.
Read more6/28/2024