Encoding Shape and Spatial Relations: The Role of Receptive Field Size in Coordinating Complementary Representations

Using a novel modular architecture, networks were not preassigned a task, but rather competed to perform the different tasks, and networks with small nonoverlapping receptive fields tended to win the competition for categorical tasks whereas networks with large overlapping receptive fields tend to winThe competition for exemplar/metric tasks.

Abstract

An effective functional architecture facilitates interactions among subsystems that are often used together. Computer simulations showed that differences in receptive field sizes can promote such organization. When input was filtered through relatively small nonoverlapping receptive fields, artificial neural net‐works learned to categorize shapes relatively quickly; in contrast, when input was filtered through relatively large overlapping receptive fields, networks learned to encode specific shape exemplars or metric spatial relations relatively quickly. Moreover, when the receptive field sizes were allowed to adapt during learning, networks developed smaller receptive fields when they were trained to categorize shapes or spatial relations, and developed larger receptive fields when they were trained to encode specific exemplars or metric distances. In addition, when pairs of networks were constrained to use input from the same type of receptive fields, networks learned a task faster when they were paired with networks that were trained to perform a compatible type of task. Finally, using a novel modular architecture, networks were not preassigned a task, but rather competed to perform the different tasks. Networks with small nonover‐lapping receptive fields tended to win the competition for categorical tasks whereas networks with large overlapping receptive fields tended to win the competition for exemplar/metric tasks.