ライフサイエンスコーパス: object recognition

1 and background variation (a.k.a. core visual object recognition).

2 separation, whereas, CA3 underpins identical object recognition.

3 integration against attentional selection in object recognition.

4 r temporal cortex, an area underlying visual object recognition.

5 ils into a holistic percept is essential for object recognition.

6 ns with more posterior regions during visual object recognition.

7 tasks such as navigation, prey detection and object recognition.

8 tex attempts to recover semantic content for object recognition.

9 cts in clutter, and is a major constraint on object recognition.

10 mprehension difficulties after factoring out object recognition.

11 l and fusiform gyri, two areas important for object recognition.

12 sfer of complex tactile information, such as object recognition.

13 in human and nonhuman primates serves visual object recognition.

14 of IT neurons, as the final stage of visual object recognition.

15 s are key to understanding biological visual object recognition.

16 oral (PIT) cortex cells contribute to visual object recognition.

17 ul model to study the neuronal substrates of object recognition.

18 ed at fear extinction and novel- and spatial object recognition.

19 ry enhancing effects in a rat model of novel object recognition.

20 lidation and the beneficial effects of E2 on object recognition.

21 g and guided action and a ventral stream for object recognition.

22 it shares common pathways with visual-based object recognition.

23 nd that hippocampal lesions impair nonvisual object recognition.

24 general principles of visual processing and object recognition.

25 magnification confocal laser scanning and 3D object recognition.

26 on in contextual fear conditioning and novel object recognition.

27 Normal aging causes a decline in object recognition.

28 le of the ventral cortical pathway in visual object recognition.

29 rect evidence that scene context facilitates object recognition.

30 ing and necessary for accurate and efficient object recognition.

31 s is inspired by a recent breakthrough in 2D object recognition.

32 rkedly impaired on a new test of spontaneous object recognition.

33 of the ventral stream that are important for object recognition.

34 ically based linkage of visual attributes to object recognition.

35 ical hierarchy, which may ultimately lead to object recognition.

36 ther functions, such as color perception and object recognition.

37 was assessed by Morris water maze and novel object recognition.

38 ly uncorrelated both with g and with general object recognition.

39 ral visual stream underlies key human visual object recognition abilities.

40 int-invariant representations that supported object recognition across large, novel, and complex chan

41 assical constancy effects, serves to enhance object recognition across varied lighting conditions in

42 recognition mechanisms are not necessary for object recognition after laboratory-based training.

43 Based on object recognition algorithms, these colored ends can be

44 logies as well as biomechanical modeling and object-recognition algorithms will facilitate the applic

45 architectures that better support invariant object recognition also produce image representations th

46 r two functionally distinct stages of visual object recognition: an early, presumably preparatory sta

47 dings with exposure settings that facilitate object recognition; analysis of the resulting recordings

48 whisker deprivation, impaired texture novel object recognition and altered social behavior.

49 in rodent behavioral cognition models (novel object recognition and auditory sensory gating).

50 aster than memory formation, impacting novel object recognition and cued fear conditioning but not sp

51 n reduced long-term but not short-term novel object recognition and decreased long-term potentiation

52 ht to go beyond qualitative models of visual object recognition and determine whether a single neuron

53 ur results show that spontaneous cross-modal object recognition and dynamic weighting of sensory inpu

54 could block the effects of DH E2 infusion on object recognition and epigenetic processes.

55 It is crucial for visual object recognition and has been a focus of many studies

56 duced lasting cognitive impairments in novel object recognition and less severe deficits in Y-maze be

57 perform males on a memory task that combines object recognition and location but only when circulatin

58 nted the ability of SKF81297 to rescue novel object recognition and long-term potentiation.

59 on, cognitive function was assessed by novel object recognition and Morris water maze.

60 ng as shown by improved performance in novel object recognition and Morris water maze.

61 e the first to reveal direct facilitation of object recognition and neural representation by scene ba

62 tions in signal processing, computer vision, object recognition and neurobiology.

63 behaviors linked to the hippocampus, namely, object recognition and novelty-suppressed feeding, were

64 owever, the performance of female rodents on object recognition and object location tasks often is en

65 l object-in-place task, combines elements of object recognition and object location tasks used to ass

66 PPT) or ERbeta (DPN) agonists enhanced novel object recognition and object placement memory in ovarie

67 ommunication and social cognition as well as object recognition and other functions.

68 ocampal behavioral assays, it prevents novel object recognition and placement without affecting conte

69 s an important tool for applications such as object recognition and remote sensing.

70 Impaired novel object recognition and rotarod performance were consiste

71 KO in PV-interneurons significantly impaired object recognition and social interactions and elevated

72 nge of tactile behaviors such as navigation, object recognition and social interactions.

73 17beta-estradiol (E2) to enhance hippocampal object recognition and spatial memory depends on rapid a

74 DH infusion of the GPER agonist G-1 enhanced object recognition and spatial memory in ovariectomized

75 ibitor SP600125 prevented G-1 from enhancing object recognition and spatial memory, but the ERK inhib

76 Although GPER activation did enhance object recognition and spatial memory, it did so by acti

77 function as an estrogen receptor to regulate object recognition and spatial memory.

78 0 knockout mice show significant deficits in object recognition and spatial memory.

79 PTZ restored long-term object recognition and spatial working memory for at lea

80 ral fusiform gyrus is critically involved in object recognition and that an impairment to this region

81 apable of performing spontaneous cross-modal object recognition and that the sensory inputs are weigh

82 a ventral and dorsal stream specializing in object recognition and vision for action, respectively.

83 into separate dorsal and ventral streams for object recognition and visuospatial representation.

84 nition and spatial memory, measured by novel object recognition and Y-maze tests.

85 rt-term memory of mice was assessed by novel object recognition and Y-maze tests.

86 PV-M1 knockout mice exhibited impaired novel object recognition and, to a lesser extent, impaired spa

87 d impairment of memory retrieval on both the object-recognition and the object-location tasks.

88 onsists of a ventral stream, specialized for object recognition, and a dorsal visual stream, which is

89 ted by Y-maze spontaneous alternation, novel object recognition, and Barnes maze spatial memory tests

90 ight Dark Latency, Elevated Plus Maze, Novel Object Recognition, and Barnes Maze.

91 social interaction deficits, impaired novel object recognition, and behavioral inflexibility.

92 n mice in the novel place recognition, novel object recognition, and contextual fear conditioning tas

93 ction, including deficits in spatial memory, object recognition, and fear conditioning.

94 eted tests assessing their face recognition, object recognition, and general cognitive abilities.

95 hysiological changes are directly related to object recognition, and should be helpful in assessing t

96 biologically-inspired hierarchical model of object recognition, and use loopy belief propagation to

97 brain areas thought to be involved in visual object recognition are arranged in a hierarchy.

98 e-building computations necessary to support object recognition are implemented in a balanced manner

99 radial-arm water maze performance and novel object recognition as early as 8 months, outcrossed Abet

100 al brain regions correlated with facilitated object recognition as reflected in behavioral priming.

101 t in cognitive abilities, as seen with novel object recognition as well as spatial learning and memor

102 ried out tests assessing facial identity and object recognition, as well as basic visual processing.

103 A novel hypothesis of object recognition asserts that multiple regions are eng

104 ffects were assessed by Open-field and Novel-Object-Recognition at P30 and P120.

105 ctile interaction could reflect a process of object recognition, based on the prior that many objects

106 To test true object recognition behavior (rather than image matching)

107 ng, it is not known whether invariant visual object recognition behavior is quantitatively comparable

108 uestion, we systematically compared the core object recognition behavior of two monkeys with that of

109 re aggregated to characterize "pooled human" object recognition behavior, as well as 33 separate Mech

110 pothesis can quantitatively account for core object recognition behavior.

111 w ventral stream neuronal responses underlie object recognition behavior.

112 cation and thus informs our understanding of object recognition breakdown in peripheral vision [2].

113 d found, that affect influenced the speed of object recognition by modulating the speed and amplitude

114 Moreover, the model shows how object recognition can be achieved by a sparse readout o

115 s, and monkeys demonstrate robust crossmodal object recognition (CMOR), identifying objects across se

116 nsfer of tactile object experience to visual object recognition, demonstrating that the two senses ar

117 To examine how invariant object recognition develops in a newborn visual system,

118 asks dependent on hippocampus (Y-maze, novel object recognition, dual solution cross-maze) and also s

119 ses the possibility that multiple classes of object recognition failures in peripheral vision can be

120 ex of an agnosic patient who was impaired at object recognition following a lesion to the right later

121 e in the substrate of cortical processing in object recognition following long-term adaptation to mac

122 e may be involved in odor representation and object recognition has been largely ignored.

123 So far, spontaneous cross-modal object recognition has only been shown in a few mammalia

124 -order visual patterns in the early stage of object recognition hierarchy.

125 anomia exists without word comprehension or object recognition impairments.

126 ion scale, which might bear implications for object recognition in ASD.

127 dpoint, it is not clear how the challenge of object recognition in clutter can be solved if downstrea

128 le, unifying model of how the brain performs object recognition in clutter.

129 , unifying account of how the brain performs object recognition in clutter.

130 The neural mechanisms underlying object recognition in cluttered scenes (i.e., containing

131 how that simulations using the HMAX model of object recognition in cortex can fit the aforementioned

132 ple short training trials also rescued novel object recognition in Fmr1 KOs.

133 ditory cortex, and brain regions involved in object recognition in general must deal with the natural

134 ovides the neural basis for efficient visual object recognition in humans.

135 es of contextual fear conditioning and novel object recognition in I-2 heterozygous mice suggest that

136 cesses on difficult standardized problems of object recognition in images.

137 f DPFE into perirhinal cortex restored novel object recognition in long-access meth rats.

138 x weak, even though location is important to object recognition in natural settings?

139 ied, including tasks to assess memory (novel object recognition in open field and V-maze paradigms),

140 ent demonstration of transformation-tolerant object recognition in rats.

141 vation in the extended-hippocampal system to object recognition in the dark, there was no evidence th

142 ew on the spatio-temporal dynamics of visual object recognition in the human visual brain.

143 Object recognition in the peripheral visual field is lim

144 xposure alters the circuitry responsible for object recognition, in this case obviating the need for

145 Recently, neural network models of visual object recognition, including biological and deep networ

146 Current computational models of object recognition, including recent deep-learning netwo

147 However, both lesions left novel object recognition intact.

148 Size-invariant object recognition is a bedrock for many perceptual and

149 e in understanding the process of biological object recognition is how these neurons learn to form se

150 the neural level, that visual integration in object recognition is impaired in ASD, when details had

151 Furthermore we show that cross-modal object recognition is influenced by a dynamic weighting

152 pable of advanced visual processing, such as object recognition, is limited.

153 For object recognition, it appears that there is mandatory i

154 To deepen our understanding of object recognition, it is critical to understand the nat

155 Existing models of object recognition lack such capabilities.

156 The antagonist exendin (9-39) impaired object recognition learning and spatial learning in a wa

157 had impaired memory as determined using the object recognition, light/dark box and step-down assays.

158 y shows that powerful, robust, and invariant object recognition machinery is an inherent feature of t

159 ortex, the part of the brain responsible for object recognition, makes this problem experimentally tr

160 bly mediated through root exudates, and root-object recognition mediated by physical contact at the r

161 rain Crtl1 knock-out mice enhances long-term object recognition memory and facilitates long-term depr

162 Glra2 knockout mice exhibited deficits in object recognition memory and impaired long-term potenti

163 pocampal lesions were tested in the dark for object recognition memory at different retention delays.

164 est that histone acetylation is critical for object recognition memory consolidation and the benefici

165 pus (DH) immediately after training impaired object recognition memory consolidation in ovariectomize

166 ory for the training object, indicating that object recognition memory consolidation is dependent on

167 n normal adult synaptic plasticity and novel object recognition memory in mice exposed to ethanol at

168 We show here that SST(3) is critical for object recognition memory in mice.

169 ng pathways is necessary for E(2) to enhance object recognition memory in middle-aged females.

170 ibition, improved social behavior, and novel object recognition memory in NMDA receptor hypofunctioni

171 e present study examined the neural basis of object recognition memory in the dark, with a view to de

172 No difference was observed in object recognition memory in the GluD1 KO mice.

173 dating the role of the rodent hippocampus in object recognition memory is critical for establishing t

174 n the present study, rats were given a novel object recognition memory task in which initial encounte

175 induced cognitive improvements in the novel object recognition memory test in NR1-KD animals, and it

176 llection and familiarity were assessed in an object recognition memory test using receiver operator c

177 ions of the PL and IL mPFC on three tests of object recognition memory that required judgments about

178 demonstrate a role for the human PRC during object recognition memory, following a period of object,

179 n the open field, restore PPI, improve novel object recognition memory, partially normalize social be

180 are correlated with decreases in spatial and object recognition memory, postsynaptic function, and sy

181 Object recognition memory, shifting between established

182 physiological processes thought to underlie object recognition memory.

183 ic antagonist NBQX was sufficient to disrupt object recognition memory.

184 nd AMPA-mediated transmission contributes to object recognition memory.

185 cation memory in the rat, but did not affect object recognition memory.

186 s in spatial working memory and in long-term object recognition memory.

187 the perirhinal cortex, a neural correlate of object recognition memory.

188 the effects of pre-retrieval interference on object recognition memory.

189 t, they do not correlate with differences in object recognition memory.

190 on (L-LTP) and hippocampus-dependent spatial object recognition memory.

191 paration whereas CA3 predicts performance in object recognition memory.

192 t memory-enhancing effects in a rat model of object recognition memory.

193 At three doses tested in the mouse novel object recognition model (1, 3, and 10 mg/kg s.c.), 6s d

194 he models include well-known neuroscientific object-recognition models (e.g. HMAX, VisNet) along with

195 teral or right-sided inferotemporal/fusiform object recognition network, which remained relatively sp

196 ne (PCP), induces enduring deficits in novel object recognition (NOR) in rodents.

197 ss meth self-administration results in novel object recognition (NOR) memory deficits in rats.

198 rsing the effect of scopolamine in the novel object recognition (NOR) paradigm with a minimum effecti

199 sleep after the learning phase of the novel object recognition (NOR) task significantly decreased th

200 pocampus at distinct stages during the novel object recognition (NOR) task: during object memory enco

201 ), which relies on olfactory cues, and novel object recognition (NOR), a visual-recognition task.

202 er-dose-dependent anxiety and impaired novel object recognition (NOR).

203 e) and a hippocampus-independent task (Novel Object Recognition, NOR).

204 ate-of-the-art in speech recognition, visual object recognition, object detection and many other doma

205 ry in tests of cued fear conditioning, novel object recognition, object location recognition, conditi

206 -term memories, including fear conditioning, object recognition, object placement, social recognition

207 ocial behaviors or memories, including novel object recognition or fear conditioning, were not affect

208 improved non-spatial cognitive performance (object recognition, p<0.016 vs. saline) but had little e

209 Here, we used a modified object recognition paradigm to show that the tgCRND8 mou

210 impairment of learning and memory in a novel object recognition paradigm.

211 cognitive performance in working memory and object recognition paradigms at baseline and after psych

212 ate visual system achieves remarkable visual object recognition performance even in brief presentatio

213 stream of nonhuman primates and measured the object recognition performance of >100 human observers.

214 g hypothesis quantitatively account for core object recognition performance over a broad range of tas

215 odel provides a novel prediction about human object recognition performance, namely, that target reco

216 designed a database of images for evaluating object recognition performance.

217 The object recognition procedure was tested on samples with

218 erve as an important contextual influence on object recognition processes.

219 Object recognition relies on a series of transformations

220 omputational principles underlying invariant object recognition remain mostly unknown.

221 d adult hippocampal neurogenesis show normal object recognition, spatial learning, contextual fear co

222 Impairments in object recognition, spatial memory retention, and networ

223 s involved in this type of learning (such as object recognition, spatial orientation, and associative

224 Scenes strongly facilitate object recognition, such as when we make out the shape o

225 by analogy to the neural organization of the object recognition system, that demonstration of modulat

226 ed (26 months) mice were tested in the novel object recognition task (NORT).

227 ion of LC-NE enhanced performance in a novel object recognition task and reduced hyperactivity in Ts6

228 activity in animal models of cognition like object recognition task and water maze and in brain micr

229 ognitive activity (1 mg/kg, ip) in the novel object recognition task as a model of memory deficit.

230 sed different strength of training for novel object recognition task in mice.

231 this work we used different versions of the object recognition task in rats to study the role of the

232 rats performed a variant of the spontaneous object recognition task in which there was a minimal del

233 simple, sufficient quantitative model: each object recognition task is learned from the spatially di

234 Learning an object recognition task was not affected either.

235 Spatial memory was impaired on the object recognition task with BPA animals spending signif

236 ) was evaluated by a short term memory task (object recognition task) and immunohistochemical stainin

237 (STM) and long-term memory (LTM) in a novel object recognition task, but exhibit impairments during

238 ly after training in a hippocampal-dependent object recognition task, mice received a dorsal hippocam

239 Mutant mice showed deficits in the novel object recognition task, suggesting hippocampal dysfunct

240 ve alterations, including defects in a novel object recognition task.

241 -, but not the long-term memory in the novel-object recognition task.

242 onal performance of IT cortex on this visual object recognition task.

243 ice outperformed wild-type mice in the novel object recognition task.

244 us maze, holeboard, light-dark box and novel object recognition task.

245 gnetoencephalography while they completed an object recognition task.

246 We used the novel object-recognition task as a model of nonemotional memor

247 ignaled, and renewal) and two context-guided object recognition tasks (with 3D and 2D objects), we ex

248 We used crossmodal object recognition tasks in rats to study the neurobiolo

249 Monkeys were trained to perform binary object recognition tasks on a match-to-sample paradigm.

250 They comprised tabletop object recognition tasks, a self-assessment mobility que

251 mice were tested in the water maze and novel object recognition tasks.

252 mple, become engaged in auditory and tactile object-recognition tasks.

253 memories were robustly improved in the novel-object recognition test and Morris water-maze spatial ta

254 We assessed cognition with the novel object recognition test and stained for amyloid precurso

255 e profile as it improved memory in the novel object recognition test but had no antidepressant or anx

256 on tests, and their memory loss in the novel object recognition test is associated with high levels o

257 im, Y-maze spontaneous alternation and novel-object recognition test performance that developed after

258 Finally, an object recognition test performed in mice revealed that

259 Notably, the novel-object recognition test showed that the treatment amelio

260 In an in vivo object recognition test with CD1 mice, oral administrati

261 dark box test) and cognitive function (novel object recognition test).

262 ne-lesioned mice were subjected to the novel object recognition test, and long-term potentiation was

263 Indeed, p140Cap(-/-) mice are impaired in object recognition test, as well as in LTP and in LTD me

264 gnitive impairment, as assessed by the novel object recognition test, but not signs of brain inflamma

265 formances observed at 0.3 and 1 mg/kg on the object recognition test.

266 itive impairment when examined using a novel object recognition test.

267 oved memory performance of CES rats in novel-object recognition tests and in the Morris water maze.

268 d prepulse inhibition, open field, and novel object recognition tests to evaluate behavior in female

269 We measured human performance in 64 object recognition tests using thousands of challenging

270 connectome), auditory word comprehension and object recognition tests were obtained from 67 chronic l

271 ory retention in passive avoidance and novel object recognition tests, and their memory loss in the n

272 r-conditioning, Morris water maze, and novel object recognition tests.

273 ear conditioning, object location, and novel object recognition tests.

274 ancement in radial arm maze, water maze, and object recognition tests.

275 in LTP and show behavioural abnormalities in object recognition tests.

276 d short-term memory deficits, as assessed by object-recognition tests, and was effective at improving

277 hus endows us with a remarkable capacity for object recognition, texture discrimination, sensory-moto

278 de spatiotemporal constraints on theories of object recognition that involve recurrent processing.

279 Crowding is the breakdown in object recognition that occurs in cluttered visual envir

280 Mounting evidence suggests that 'core object recognition,' the ability to rapidly recognize ob

281 Size-invariant object recognition-the ability to recognize objects acro

282 perception into unified concepts, supporting object recognition, thought, and language.

283 Object recognition thus required perceptual integration

284 l, this work extends an established model of object recognition to include high-level feedback modula

285 owding (the deleterious effect of clutter on object recognition) to the precision of saccadic eye mov

286 on of visual crowding, a major limitation on object recognition, to show that, in humans with long-st

287 d visual cortex could interact to facilitate object recognition under occlusion.

288 difficult to perceive, presumably to assist object recognition under varied illumination.

289 have led to ever higher performing models of object recognition using artificial deep neural networks

290 tigate the effects of scene context on rapid object recognition using both behavioral and electrophys

291 In the standard hierarchical model of visual object recognition, V1 neurons were commonly assumed to

292 pus enhanced selective attention and spatial object recognition via the dopamine D1/D5 receptor.

293 networks trained end-to-end in tasks such as object recognition, video games, and board games, achiev

294 Novel object recognition was not impaired in R192Q mice; howev

295 tative models of the biological substrate of object recognition, we ask: can a single ventral stream

296 ely from local populations supporting visual object recognition, we show that recurrent circuitry sup

297 ated that fitness-related changes in complex object recognition were modulated by hippocampal perfusi

298 were modestly or minimally impaired in novel object recognition, whereas similar-duration multimodal

299 form a remarkably rapid and robust basis for object recognition which belies the difficulties faced b

300 al species differences in spatial memory and object recognition, young adult male Sprague-Dawley rats