4.7 Article

Deep saliency models learn low-, mid-, and high-level features to predict scene attention

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-97879-z

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Eye Institute of the National Institutes of Health [R01EY027792]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Deep saliency models are currently the state-of-the-art in predicting human gaze behavior in real-world scenes, and understanding their feature prioritization can provide insights into cognitive theories of attention. Research reveals that these models primarily learn image features associated with high-level scene meaning and low-level image saliency, but exhibit differences in feature weightings and interaction patterns.
Deep saliency models represent the current state-of-the-art for predicting where humans look in real-world scenes. However, for deep saliency models to inform cognitive theories of attention, we need to know how deep saliency models prioritize different scene features to predict where people look. Here we open the black box of three prominent deep saliency models (MSI-Net, DeepGaze II, and SAM-ResNet) using an approach that models the association between attention, deep saliency model output, and low-, mid-, and high-level scene features. Specifically, we measured the association between each deep saliency model and low-level image saliency, mid-level contour symmetry and junctions, and high-level meaning by applying a mixed effects modeling approach to a large eye movement dataset. We found that all three deep saliency models were most strongly associated with high-level and low-level features, but exhibited qualitatively different feature weightings and interaction patterns. These findings suggest that prominent deep saliency models are primarily learning image features associated with high-level scene meaning and low-level image saliency and highlight the importance of moving beyond simply benchmarking performance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据