25 years of CNNs: Can we compare to human abstraction capabilities?
Sebastian Stabinger, Antonio Rodr\'iguez-S\'anchez, Justus Piater

TL;DR
This paper evaluates the progress of convolutional neural networks over 25 years in classifying abstract images, revealing that current models still lag behind human capabilities in solving certain vision tasks.
Contribution
It introduces a comparative framework using abstract image classification to assess the progress of CNNs versus human performance over time.
Findings
CNNs perform worse than humans on abstract classification tasks.
No significant progress in CNNs' ability to handle abstract visual properties over 25 years.
Current CNNs still struggle with tasks humans find easy.
Abstract
We try to determine the progress made by convolutional neural networks over the past 25 years in classifying images into abstractc lasses. For this purpose we compare the performance of LeNet to that of GoogLeNet at classifying randomly generated images which are differentiated by an abstract property (e.g., one class contains two objects of the same size, the other class two objects of different sizes). Our results show that there is still work to do in order to solve vision problems humans are able to solve without much difficulty.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Neural Network Applications · Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection · Retinal Imaging and Analysis
Methods1x1 Convolution · Convolution · Average Pooling · Local Response Normalization · Auxiliary Classifier · Inception Module · *Communicated@Fast*How Do I Communicate to Expedia? · Dropout · Dense Connections · Max Pooling
