mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Do computer vision foundation models learn the low-level characteristics of the human visual system?

arXiv 2502.20256 ↗First posted 27 Feb 2025cs.CVcited by 12

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Computer vision foundation models, such as DINO or OpenCLIP, are trained in a self-supervised manner on large image datasets. Analogously, substantial evidence suggests that the human visual system (HVS) is influenced by the statistical distribution of colors and patterns in the natural world, characteristics also present in the training data of foundation models. The question we address in this paper is whether foundation models trained on natural images mimic some of the low-level characteristics of the human visual system, such as contrast detection, contrast masking, and contrast constancy. Specifically, we designed a protocol comprising nine test types to evaluate the image encoders of 45 foundation and generative models. Our results indicate that some foundation models (e.g., DINO, DINOv2, and OpenCLIP), share some of the characteristics of human vision, but other models show little resemblance. Foundation models tend to show smaller sensitivity to low contrast and rather irregular responses to contrast across frequencies. The foundation models show the best agreement with human data in terms of contrast masking. Our findings suggest that human vision and computer vision may take both similar and different paths when learning to interpret images of the real world. Overall, while differences remain, foundation models trained on vision tasks start to align with low-level human vision, with DINOv2 showing the closest resemblance.

Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Feb 2025.

Builds on

20 of 44 references.

References · 20

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  2. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
  3. 2021High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 18,863
  4. 2023Segment Anythingcited by 8,234
  5. 2021Masked Autoencoders Are Scalable Vision Learnerscited by 7,403
  6. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
  7. 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,968
  8. 2024SAM 2: Segment Anything in Images and Videoscited by 2,863
  9. 2018ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustnesscited by 1,432
  10. 2021Partial success in closing the gap between human and machine visioncited by 185
  11. 2021Are Convolutional Neural Networks or Transformers more like human vision?cited by 109
  12. 2023Neither hype nor gloom do DNNs justicecited by 40
8 more
  1. 2024ColorVideoVDP: A visual difference predictor for image, video and display distortionscited by 34
  2. 2023Generalizable Black-Box Adversarial Attack with Meta Learningcited by 29
  3. 2021Contrast Sensitivity Functions in Autoencoderscited by 13
  4. 2023BridgeNet: Comprehensive and Effective Feature Interactions via Bridge Feature for Multi-task Dense Predictionscited by 12
  5. 2025Adversarially Robust CLIP Models Can Induce Better (Robust) Perceptual Metricscited by 10
  6. 2023Multi-Object Manipulation via Object-Centric Neural Scattering Functionscited by 9
  7. 2024Foundation Models Boost Low-Level Perceptual Similarity Metricscited by 6
  8. 2023Rethinking Cross-Domain Pedestrian Detection: A Background-Focused Distribution Alignment Framework for Instance-Free One-Stage Detectorscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 7; 2026: 5.

12 papers.