Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #671052. 	[Title] Task and Spatial Frequency Effects on Face Specialization [Abstract] There is strong evidence that face processing is localized in the brain. The double dissociation between prosopagnosia, a face recognition deficit occurring after brain damage, and visual object agnosia, difficulty recognizing other kinds of complex objects, indicates that face and non-face object recognition may be served by partially independent mechanisms in the brain. Is neural specialization innate or learned? We suggest that this specialization could be the result of a competitive learning mechanism that, during development, devotes neural resources to the tasks they are best at performing. Further, we suggest that the specialization arises as an interaction between task requirements and developmental constraints. In this paper, we present a feed-forward computational model of visual processing, in which two modules compete to classify input stimuli. When one module receives low spatial frequency information and the other receives high spatial frequency information, and the task is to identify the faces while simply classifying the objects, the low frequency network shows a strong specialization for faces. No other combination of tasks and inputs shows this strong specialization. We take these results as support for the idea that an innately-specified face processing module is unnecessary. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1132416. 	[Title] Learning a Specialization for Face Recognition: The Effect of Spatial Frequency [Abstract] The double dissociation between prosopagnosia, a face recognition deficit occurring after brain damage, and visual object agnosia, difficulty recognizing other kinds of complex objects, indicates that face and non-face object recognition may be served by partially independent mechanisms in the brain. Such a dissociation could be the result of a competitive learning mechanism that, during development, devotes neural resources to the tasks they are best at performing. Studies of normal adult performance on face and object recognition tasks seem to indicate that face recognition is primarily configural, involving the low spatial frequency information present in a stimulus over relatively large distances, whereas object recognition is primarily featural, involving analysis of the object's parts using local, high spatial frequency information. In a feed-forward computational model of visual processing, two modules compete to classify input stimuli; when one module receives low spatial frequency information and the other receives high spatial frequency information, the low-frequency module shows a strong specialization for face recognition in a combined face identification/object classification task. The series of experiments shows that the fine discrimination necessary for distinguishing members of a visually homoge neous class such as faces relies heavily on the low spatial frequencies present in a stimulus. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1132406. 	[Title] Prosopagnosia in Modular Neural Network Models [Abstract] There is strong evidence that face processing in the brain is localized. The double dissociation between prosopagnosia, a face recognition deficit occurring after brain damage, and visual object agnosia, difficulty recognizing other kinds of complex objects, indicates that face and non-face object recognition may be served by partially independent neural mechanisms. In this chapter, we use computational models to show how the face processing specialization apparently underlying prosopagnosia and visual object agnosia could be attributed to 1) a relatively simple competitive selection mechanism that, during development, devotes neural resources to the tasks they are best at performing, 2) the developing infant's need to perform subordinate classification (identification) of faces early on, and 3) the infant's low visual acuity at birth. Inspired by de Schonen and Mancini's (1998) arguments that factors like these could bias the visual system to develop a specialized face processor, and Jacobs and Kosslyn's (1994) experiments in the mixtures of experts (ME) modeling paradigm, we provide a preliminary computational demonstration of how this theory accounts for the double dissociation between face and object processing. We present two feed-forward computational models of visual processing. In both models, the selection mechanism is a gating network that mediates a competition between modules attempting to classify input stimuli. In Model I, when the modules are simple unbiased classifiers, the competition is sufficient to achieve enough of a specialization that damaging one module impairs the model's face recognition more than its object recognition, and damaging the other module impairs the model's object recognition more than its face recognition. In Model II, however, we bias the modules by providing one with low spatial frequency information and the other with high spatial frequency information. In this case, when the model's task is subordinate classification of faces and superordinate classification of objects, the low spatial frequency network shows an even stronger specialization for faces. No other combination of tasks and inputs shows this strong specialization. We take these results as support for the idea that something resembling a face processing "module" could arise as a natural consequence of the infant's developmental environment without being innately specified. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #430711. 	[Title] A Mixture of Experts Model Exhibiting Prosopagnosia [Abstract] A considerable body of evidence from prosopagnosia, a deficit in face recognition dissociable from nonface object recognition, indicates that the visual system devotes a specialized functional area to mechanisms appropriate for face processing. We present a modular neural network composed of two expert networks and one mediating gate network with the task of learning to recognize the faces of 12 individuals and classifying 36 nonface objects as members of one of three classes. While learning the task, the network tends to divide labor between the two expert modules, with one expert specializing in face processing and the other specializing in nonface object processing. After training, we observe the network's performance on a test set as one of the experts is progressively damaged. The results roughly agree with data reported for prosopagnosic patients: as damage to the face expert increases, the network's face recognition performance decreases dramatically while its object classification performance drops slowly. We conclude that data-driven competitive learning between two unbiased functional units can give rise to localized face processing, and that selective damage in such a system could underlie prosopagnosia. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #671052 has the title `Task and Spatial Frequency Effects on Face Specialization  
` and the abstract `There is strong evidence that face processing is localized in the brain. The double dissociation between prosopagnosia, a face recognition deficit occurring after brain damage, and visual object agnosia, difficulty recognizing other kinds of complex objects, indicates that face and non-face object recognition may be served by partially independent mechanisms in the brain. Is neural specialization innate or learned? We suggest that this specialization could be the result of a competitive learning mechanism that, during development, devotes neural resources to the tasks they are best at performing. Further, we suggest that the specialization arises as an interaction between task requirements and developmental constraints. In this paper, we present a feed-forward computational model of visual processing, in which two modules compete to classify input stimuli. When one module receives low spatial frequency information and the other receives high spatial frequency information, and the task is to identify the faces while simply classifying the objects, the low frequency network shows a strong specialization for faces. No other combination of tasks and inputs shows this strong specialization. We take these results as support for the idea that an innately-specified face processing module is unnecessary.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #671052 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #671052 has the title `Task and Spatial Frequency Effects on Face Specialization  
` and the abstract `There is strong evidence that face processing is localized in the brain. The double dissociation between prosopagnosia, a face recognition deficit occurring after brain damage, and visual object agnosia, difficulty recognizing other kinds of complex objects, indicates that face and non-face object recognition may be served by partially independent mechanisms in the brain. Is neural specialization innate or learned? We suggest that this specialization could be the result of a competitive learning mechanism that, during development, devotes neural resources to the tasks they are best at performing. Further, we suggest that the specialization arises as an interaction between task requirements and developmental constraints. In this paper, we present a feed-forward computational model of visual processing, in which two modules compete to classify input stimuli. When one module receives low spatial frequency information and the other receives high spatial frequency information, and the task is to identify the faces while simply classifying the objects, the low frequency network shows a strong specialization for faces. No other combination of tasks and inputs shows this strong specialization. We take these results as support for the idea that an innately-specified face processing module is unnecessary.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #671052 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].

This paper should be classified into: Neural_Networks