A Critical Test of Deep Convolutional Neural Networks’ Ability to Capture Recurrent Processing in the Brain Using Visual Masking

Recurrent processing is a crucial feature in human visual processing supporting perceptual grouping, figure-ground segmentation, and recognition under challenging conditions. There is a clear need to incorporate recurrent processing in deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) but the computations underlying recurrent processing remain unclear. In this paper, we tested a form of recurrence in deep residual networks (ResNets) to capture recurrent processing signals in the human brain. Though ResNets are feedforward networks, they approximate an excitatory additive form of recurrence. Essentially, this form of recurrence consists of repeating excitatory activations in response to a static stimulus. Here, we used ResNets of varying depths (reflecting varying levels of recurrent processing) to explain electroencephalography (EEG) activity within a visual masking paradigm. Sixty-two humans and fifty artificial agents (10 ResNet models of depths - 4, 6, 10, 18 and 34) completed an object categorization task. We show that deeper networks (ResNet-10, 18 and 34) explained more variance in brain activity compared to shallower networks (ResNet-4 and 6). Furthermore, all ResNets captured differences in brain activity between unmasked and masked trials, with differences starting at ∼98ms (from stimulus onset). These early differences indicated that EEG activity reflected ‘pure’ feedforward signals only briefly (up to ∼98ms). After ∼98ms, deeper networks showed a significant increase in explained variance which peaks at ∼200ms, but only within unmasked trials, not masked trials. In summary, we provided clear evidence that excitatory additive recurrent processing in ResNets captures some of the recurrent processing in humans.Significance statementThe challenge of modeling recurrent processes is not trivial and the operationalization of recurrent processing is highly contested. In this paper, we tested the ability of deep residual networks (ResNets) to explain recurrent processes in the human brain. Though ResNets are feedforward networks, they have been shown to equate operations in recurrent neural networks. In this study, we show that deeper networks explained more variance in brain activity than shallower networks. However, all networks still performed far from the noise ceiling. Thus, we conclude that recurrent processing in ResNets captures a form of recurrent processing in humans though other types of recurrent processing (inhibition, multiplicative) that are not present in current regular deep neural networks (alexnet, cornet, resnet) are necessary for building better visual models.