Gabor feature processing in spiking neural networks
from retina-inspired data
Aristeidis Tsitiridis, Cristina Conde, Isaac Martin de Diego, Jose Sanchez del Rio Saez, Jorge Raul Gomez, and
Enrique Cabello
Department of Computer Science and Statistics
King Juan Carlos University
Abstract- In recent years, there has been a growing interest
in dynamic vision sensors due to their incredible advantages in
speed, computational cost and power consumption. These new
vision sensors have been inspired from biological retinae and
use asynchronous address-event representation
information instead of a series of snapshots taken
traditional frame-based devices. Spiking neurons
biologically-plausible artificial neurons that
information in sequences of time events and are particularly
suited for processing address-event information. A novel and
refined biologically-inspired Gabor feature approach based on
spiking neural networks is presented here. This approach
utilises the retina-inspired data from dynamic vision sensors
with Gabor edge detection in a hierarchical structure that has
been populated with Leaky-Integrate and Fire neurons that
have been trained via the Remote Supervision Method. The
number of active spiking neurons at each time instance depends
on the number of time events. This idea provides a flexible
approach that avoids unnecessary computations
complexity. The biologically-inspired model developed for this
preliminary work has shown promising results and has laid the
foundation for a rapid parallel object recognition
designed for the new retina-like address-event representation
sensors.
Keywords-Biologically-inspired machine vision; Gabor edge
detection; Spiking neural networks; Hierarchical vision model;
Address - Event Representation (AER)
I. INTRODUCTION
An investigation of biological visual perception
properties in primates can quickly reveal certain irrefutable
advantages. It can be fast and efficient under various
conditions, for example, humans can recognise faces in
different poses in as little as 140ms [1]. In addition, these
cognitive operations consume relatively small amounts of
energy and portray adaptation to a wide spectrum of real­
world situations. Remarkably, all these visual cognitive
operations occur in parallel with other senses in a seamless
manner. Therefore, it is not surprising that researchers across
various fields, over the last years, have intensified their focus
on harnessing biologically-inspired techniques for their
applications.
Dynamic VISIOn sensors (DVS) [2] [3] mImIc certain
biological traits of the retinae. The continuous data output of
these sensors is an asynchronous stream of reflectance
978-1-4799-1959-8/15/$31.00 @2015 IEEE
Madrid, Spain
variations encoded as address-events. The Address-Event
Representation (AER) [4], i.e. reflectance events
asynchronously encoded in x, y pixel coordinates resembles
the precisely timed electrical impulses or spikes of the
for visual
spatially arranged optical nerves stemming from the retinae
from
are
to the primary visual cortex.
process
The most prevalent method for constructing biologically­
inspired vision models requires alternating hierarchical
layers following the early visual processing stages [5].
Neurons at higher layers progressively exhibit a combination
of selectivity and invariance to object translations such as
size, position, rotation, depth etc. In the recent past, there had
been many models and variants that employed this kind of
architecture such as the Neocognitron [6], Convolutional
neural network [7], and Hierarchical model and X (HMAX)
[8], and all of them produced promising results for a variety
and
of object recognition tasks. However, these models had been
solely applied for frame-driven visual scenarios which
model
considerably increased their computational cost especially as
the complexity of a given situation rose. The high
customisation for images or frames from videos had made
their integration with temporal features and consequently
video in real-time, exceptionally difficult and eventually
implausible with biology.
Soon after the emergence of AER retina sensors, several
models were introduced to harness their approach to visual
representation. A convolutional neural network was directly
applied in [9] for object recognition with minor alterations.
Although this work reported a frame-based architecture that
was applied directly to retina sensors, its fast recognition
response and rate offer a promising insight to methodologies
that share similar hierarchical characteristics. Edge detection
was performed by applying Gabor filter templates directly on
AER images. Furthermore, this model was extended to a
neuromorphic engineering application with an event-driven
convolution module [10] and combined with AER sensors
was employed for high-speed recognition examples. The
spiking neuron model presented in [11], was a biologically­
plausible approach that captured temporal visual information
and learned features in an unsupervised manner based on the
Spike-Timing Dependent Plasticity (STDP) [12]. This
hierarchical Spiking Neural Network (SNN) performed,
similarly to the model in [9], fast and accurately in tests for
tracking cars. While the topology of this network was
biologically-plausible, there was no provision for edge
detection operations to match the activity of VI cells, i.e. the
neurons located in area VI of the visual cortex. More
recently, the model in [13] proposed a convolutional neural
network with Gabor filter templates for edge detection and a
SNN classifier (Tempotron) for object recognition with
impressive results compared to HMAX.
Inspired from the early hierarchical operations of the
primary visual cortex, this work presents a new Gabor
feature-based model of feed-forward Leaky-Integrate and
Fire (LIF) spiking neurons that acts as precursor work for a
future object recognition model that can fully exploit retina
sensor data in real-time. The LIF neurons are trained as VI
simple cells to perform orientation selective edge detection
spatiotemporally. In contrast to previous models where
Gabor filters are directly convolved over the original image,
in this work, spiking neurons are created to exploit the
asynchronous temporal nature of AER information.
Subsequently, a layer of neurons with properties similar to
complex cells pool AER information via spatial summation
with greater Receptive Fields (RF) following the principles
of their biological inspiration [5].
11. METHODOLOGY
This section presents the development steps taken to
create a biologically-inspired model capable of processing
AER information. The discussion centres on the nature of
AER data, the fundamental processing units to carry the
subsequent biological-like operations, the learning rule to
appropriately tune neurons, and the overall model structure
layer by layer.
AER data
DVS provide a wide dynamic range with low response
latency. Notably, incoming visual events are processed in the
time domain real-time in contrast to conventional cameras
that capture visual information in regular intervals (frames)
regardless of their significance. Another advantage of DVS
is their extremely low power consumption which makes
them particularly suitable for a wide selection of applications
where power management is critical, e.g. navigation and
robotics. At this moment, two major drawbacks of this type
of sensors are the low spatial resolution and limited spectral
information.
The biological retinae generate continuous electrical
impulses to represent differences in their perceivable light
wavelengths. This information is propagated with retinal
ganglion cells (optic nerves) via the lateral geniculate
nucleus as far as the primary visual cortex. Similarly to this,
Address-Event Representation is a protocol of asynchronous
transmission of reflection changes in the form of digital
spike events. These continuous visual signals are encoded in
spatial (x, y) addresses of pixels from DVS and time is
represented by their occurrence. Therefore, within a given
time window for address-events (AE):
AEtimewindow = f. tstart
end AExy(tev)dtev (1)
t
In equation (1), tSlarl and tend show the time in which
address-events have been processed. These input visual
events are directly supplied to LIF spiking neurons.
A. Spiking neurons
For many years, extensive biological research on the
mammalian brain has been continuously unveiling
information on its structure and mechanisms. It is known that
biological neurons are the building block of all information
processing in the brain and that they are connected in
complicated patterns to fulfil everyday activities, such as the
extremely demanding visual tasks. Mimicking biological
neuron behaviour, SNN models have emerged to improve
our understanding of the brain and indirectly harness some
its capabilities in potential applications. SNN simulate many
biological properties with the main compromise being
between biological plausibility and computational efficiency.
Amongst several models examined for this work, LIF
neurons [14] with a refractory period were preferred since
they are computationally efficient. The LIF neuron simulates
general membrane behaviour with less emphasis on other
aspects such as gate voltages. The LIF neuron temporal
operation can be described by the following equation:
d
-T m Vm
dt( t ) = - v.m (t) + RI5 (t) (2)
In equation (2), the decay term for the neuron membrane
is given by Tm = RC where R is the membrane resistance and
C is the membrane capacitance. Furthermore, Vm is the
membrane potential and Is the synaptic current. The synaptic
current in a neuron is usually expressed as the total sum of
currents from excitatory and inhibitory synapses connected
to the neuron itself. As the neuron is depolarised it reaches a
threshold voltage Vlh and then generates a spike (event). The
refractory period following repolarisation, restricts the
generation of further spikes immediately after a spike was
transmitted and adds realism to the model.
B. The learning rule - ReSuMe
Much like VI simple cells recelvmg optical nerve
impulses, the LIF neurons are expected to process incoming
AER information. A learning rule is employed so that LIF
neurons are instructed to work like simple V1 cells (section
C). This learning rule is REmote SUpervision MEthod
(ReSuMe) [15] and it is a biologically-inspired supervised
learning method for spiking neurons that concentrates on the
precise timing of their spikes. More specifically, it utilises
the learning windows approach, originally introduced from
Hebbian learning for spike trains [16], in a supervised
manner. This learning approach expands from the well­
known unsupervised method STDP [17]. In ReSuMe
learning, two opposite mechanisms are balanced comparably
to STDP and take the form of functions within specific
learning windows in time. Its first rule states that an
excitatory synapse is facilitated if a presynaptic spike is
transmitted and vice versa, an inhibitory synapse is
depressed for a similar situation. Its second rule states that an
excitatory synapse is depressed if a spike is received directly
before a postsynaptic spike and vice versa, an inhibitory
synapse is facilitated for a similar situation. The synaptic
efficacies (w) equation for ReSuMe between a presynaptic
neuron nk and a postsynaptic neuron n, is expressed as:
; [«,+ {1Jw'(Sd)SIn(t_Sd)dSd]
Wk; (t)=st(t)
+s' (t) [a'+ (s')Sin(t-s')ds']
fooo w'
In equation (3), st is the desired signal of spikes, s' the
d
learning signal of spikes, a and a' the respective non­
Hebbian amplitudes. w' and w' are the learning windows
given by the following equations:
{+: cr (;)
" in the visual cortex has been reported in many past findings
"'('")� p [25]-[27]. This topology has also been proven efficient in its
W V) � {-A�crP U)
In equations above, Wd W,
and are the exponential
windows for the desired and learning signals. and areAd A,
constants and can be positive for excitatory synapses and
Id I,
negative for inhibitory. and are positive time constants.
C. VI Cells - Gabor edge detection
V1 simple cells in the primary visual cortex process
incoming visual data [5] from the retinae and perform edge
detection operations for subsequent layers of the visual
cortex. Gabor filters have been found to match the response
of V1 cells to oriented bars or gratings and as such, have
been used to match the response of VI cells to oriented bars
or gratings [I S]-[20]. Their properties are essentially
encoded with ReSuMe as discussed in the previous section.
Fig. l.An example of a 7x7 Gabor filter at the 8 different orientations
used by the model.
A Gabor filter is a linear filter defined as the product of a
complex sinusoid with a 2D Gaussian envelope and for
values in pixel coordinates (x,y), it is expressed as:
( 2+y2y2
G(x,y)=exp - X� cos ;:- X
) (2l1:)
X=xcosB-ysinB
Y=-xsinB+ycosB
In equation (6), y is the aspect ratio and in this work is set
to 1. Parameter A is known as the wavelength of the cosine
factor and together with parameter (1, the effective width,
specify the spatial tuning accuracy of the Gabor filter. In
order to preserve the spatial integrity of the objects the
chosen number of orientations used is eight (Fig. 1). It has
been shown that the VI cell RF sizes may vary considerably
[21], [22] and can adapt and reorganise [23] during the
lifetime of the visual cortex. This principle is adopted here
and Gabor filter parameters in addition to their sizes are
(3)
explained further in the experimental setup section.
Parameterisation follows the tuning properties of VI
parafoveal cells that are exhibited on average as a response
to visual stimuli [24].
D. Model design
The hierarchical architecture of the early processing steps
(4)
adaptation to many applications in object and face
recognition [7], [S]. The main objective of such a topology is
(5)
the progressive creation of a view-invariant representation of
objects with some important invariance properties being size,
position, rotation and illumination. Similarly, the future goal
of the model is to obtain enhanced object invariance
properties. Hence, this view-invariant approach (Fig. 2) is
also partly followed here.
Cllaver
SI layer
�
Inputlaver
128x128
Fig. 2. Algorithm diagram.
1) Input to SI layer
(6)
The fust layer is named SI layer and it consists of the
simple cells created from the process previously described.
(7) These cells essentially perform edge detection operations on
(S) all incoming AER information, arranged in a spatial layer
which covers the entire extent of the retina sensor data. The
fixed AER array size of 12Sx12S is processed by various SI
RF sizes in the input layer with a subsampling factor of 2
which means that for each different RF size there is a standard pc hardware (Fig. 3). All videos were originally
different cell population. recorded with jAER, a Java interface software specifIcally
For instance in the input layer and assuming a RF size of designed for retina sensors which is publicly available [34].
3x3 with a total number of 142884 incoming retina events, The hardware setup consisted of the retina sensor [35] and an
then potentially 15876 neurons can exist each with 72 USBAERmini2 board [4] which enables timestamp
synapses that produce a total of 1143072 synapses. However, synchronised capturing of AER events.
the simultaneous operations of all of these neurons are
necessary only when the entire input layer array is
transmitting events. In practice, the number of asynchronous
events is much less and respectively for each RF a smaller
number of neurons that fIre. The algorithm examines only
incoming events, showing a signifIcant advantage over
traditional sensors that may process redundant information
with models which may need more resources and time to
process image frames as a whole.
Fig. 3. Outline of the hardware and software setup.

Lateral inhibition is a well-studied phenomenon of
biological vision and is implemented in this work for both SI
and Cl layers. Lateral inhibition is a mechanism which
promotes the activity of maximally fIring spikes by reducing
the activity of their neighbours. In some respects this activity
can be viewed as a biological threshold technique when
excessive noise is present and as such is treated here, i.e. a
noise ftIter.
2) SI to Cl layer
In the next layer referred as Cl, complex cells receive
local edge information from SI layer neurons and pool their
responses across all different RF sizes and orientations. The
pooling operation is achieved via spatial summation [28]­
[30]. Spatial summation, i.e. the integration of spike events
from various retinal RF, is another established biological
function of vision that explains how edge features propagate
in higher layers of the visual cortex. Spatial summation is
directly applied over each RF and for all orientations:
LIF neurons are pre-trained using ReSuMe with the
Gabor parameters (as explained in section I1.C and D) and
should respond maximally to the specifIc orientations of
edges they are tuned for. More specifIcally, Gabor ftIter
amplitude values are scaled and encoded to spike trains in
the time domain.
As shown in Fig. 4, each of the input neurons fIres at
precisely timed instances forming temporal patterns of Gabor
ftIters. Higher vector values are translated as delayed
responses in the time domain and vice versa, lower values to
faster responses. Since these responses are scaled the exact
fIring time of each of the input neurons directly depends on
the chosen time period. All these responses are applied to
ReSuMe in order to train multiple LIF neurons that after
training will behave as Gabor ftIters.

(9)

Equation (9) indicates that a Cl neuron response r is the

Inputspilcalnlins Input sp�.lnIins
sum of vector values x between all orientations i of a 10r-------,
BO '
particular RF size k. Following spatial summation, lateral ..'
70
inhibition is applied according to the approach proposed in ,: '
60,' :
[31]:
50 )
.. ..
"
.� 0
(10) .. 4
30 ,)
The threshold value r2 is controlled by the inhibition 20 ••
value h which is affected by the minimum and maximum 10
.:
values of the entire visual fIeld. Lateral inhibition then takes ...

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 00 0.05 0.1 0.15 02 0.25

place for every rj value lower than the threshold value r2. bme[s[ bmo[s)

Ill. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP

This section focuses on the preliminary experiments
conducted for testing the SNN model of this work. AER
processing and software code development for the model,
were accomplished in the MA TLAB environment with
Fig. 4. 3x3 and 7x7 Gabor templates at 90 degrees. Top row shows the
original templates and the bottom row the input spiking neurons firing
at precise instances (events) in time
 20
input #
00
Fig. 5. An example of a Gabor neuron training process of 300 epochs for a 7x7 RF size at 45°. a) The lower row of spike events (green dots) is
generated by membrane potential spikes which vary in each epoch and readjust according to a Poisson distribution (red dots). b) Synaptic weight
values of excitatory (positive) and inhibitory (negative) synapses. c) Correlation values for 300 training epochs
The number of input neuron events processed by each Gabor
neuron depends on the size of the respective RF size, e.g. for
a small RF size of 3x3, the total number of input neurons is
9. LIF neurons are trained for 8 different orientations and for
4 different RF sizes (Table 1). This means that in this work
the total number of pre-trained types of Gabor-like neurons
is 32.
Table 1. RF sizes and their respective G and J.. values.
RF sizes G J..
3x3 1.4 2
5x5 2 2.8
7x7 2.8 3.5
9x9 3.6 4.6
ReSuMe is an efficient learning rule and requires a
relatively small number of epochs before neurons have
reached their highest possible training score. The training
score is calculated as the highest cross-correlation number
between membrane potential spikes and desired output
spikes. Training scores are most successful when they
approach an absolute value of 1. In practice, reaching an
absolute score is not important as discussed further below.
The output spike pattern is set according to a random
predefined Poisson distribution (Fig. 5a). In past literature,
the Poisson-like distributions are known to exist in the
primary visual cortex and have often been examined in bio­
inspired systems [32], [33]. Positive synaptic weight values
signify excitatory synapses and conversely, negative values
indicate inhibitory synapses (Fig. 5b) and with every training
Fig. 6. From left to right, the leftmost input circle image is processed with various RF sizes of Gabor neurons, at 3x3, 5x5, 7x7 and 9x9 producing the
respective SI layer results.
0.8
'0
(I). 0.6
g 0.4
u
50 100 150 200 250 300
epoch #
(� �
epoch, synaptic weight values rearrange according to the
equations presented in the previous section to match the
desired spike train response;t (equation 3). As shown in Fig.
5c, the correlation values between the desired train response
;t and output spike train S', reaches a maximum value after a
relatively small number oftraining epochs. Membrane spikes
are monitored throughout the training process and spikes
with the highest correlation score achieved from all epochs,
are stored along with their respective synaptic weights.
The Poisson-like membrane spikes and synaptic weights
are the necessary parameters to define Gabor simple neurons
(or simple cells) tuned at that particular orientation and RF.
In the SI layer, all correlation measurement values higher
than a pre-set threshold value are neglected. If an edge exists
within a certain RF area of SI cells then their membrane
spikes emit patterns similar to the pre-trained spike trains.
Therefore, the cross-correlation difference between these SI
unit responses and the pre-trained responses can be
measured. These measurement values fluctuate from 0 to 1,
and like weights, they are multiplied with the incoming
signals to indicate how strong the presence of a particular
edge is.
IV. RESULTS
The SNN model is first tested against ideal shapes of 0
and 1 values without the presence of noise. Fig. 6 shows a
simple example of a solid fill circle processed by the model
with various RF sizes in the SI layer. For the given circle the
3x3 RF size produces the closest circular shape to the
original.
Moreover, it is noticeable that as the RF size increases, the edges and can be incompatible with the biological-like
quality of edge detection decreases which is caused by standards that were set for the model here.
progressively larger RF sizes overlapping on a constant small
Fig. 8 shows some examples from original AER video
area over different angles. Also by incorporating more
data and their Cl layer images. Noise reduction from lateral
information from the homogeneous space of the original
inhibition is noticeable. There are some minor improvements
circle with larger edge detection windows, thicker
in the thickness of the edges and the space between them but
overlapping edges create artefacts. This is evident from edge
it is apparent that the integrity of morphological information
information that has advanced further inside the circle,
cannot be further enhanced.
creating a thick uneven outline.
SI layer errors are mostly compensated by inhibition and
Further tests were conducted with other 'ideal' shapes
spatial surrunation in the Cl layer. In practice, using the
without the presence of noise (Fig. 7). In simpler examples
optimal RF sizes and spatial frequencies for SI unit tuning
such as the triangle and square, edge integrity appears
on the numerous objects that can be found in the real world,
slightly better. However, as the number of orientations
is a subject of rigorous analysis [20], [23] which has been
increases such as in the pentagon and star examples, corners
planned for this model in the near future. Furthermore,
progressively exhibit a thicker outline. Regardless of some of
sensor related errors are expected to be improved drastically
these tuning difficulties with RF sizes and parameterisation,
with higher spatial resolution DVS, less sensitive to noise,
all images prove the model's ability to extract spatial features
that are planned for production.
from Gabor-like spiking neurons.
It is important to mention that contrary to frame-based
AER videos pose a challenging task compared to the
approaches, AER-based data are processed in time windows
perfect shapes that have been presented so far. The
as they occur. These time windows can be set by the user
experiments centred on objects in motion without any
manually to as little as 1/-15. The chosen temporal resolution
obstructions or clutter. The video data of this work were
was set empirically to capture the objects particular speed of
captured under natural light conditions and contained some
motion. With faster moving objects this setting would
reflectance noise from background objects and surfaces.
require smaller values and with variable speed monitoring, a
Contrast polarity changes in AER data vary between three
mechanism which adjusts accordingly.
event states -1, 0 and l. The -1 state indicates that the AER
sensor pixel has detected illumination reductions and vice The speed of AER image processing was not the main
versa for l. Naturally, zero events indicate that no changes focus of these preliminary experiments. However, given the
have been detected. Since this work only focuses on the nature of AER data, the model was exceptionally efficient in
extraction and processing of spatial features, -1 occurrences processing only meaningful information as it occurred. The
are treated simply as 1. This effectively neglects directional model performs its operations only in sections were there are
motion and concentrates on the edges being detected by the time events. This is an additional advantage over frame­
AER sensor. In real-world situations object edges and based techniques which need to scan, often aimlessly, the
surfaces are not uniformly illuminated, partly due to entire image for important or meaningful visual information.
naturally occurring shadows or the direction of the light Consequently, CPU load and stored data for all the
source. Therefore, objects appear significantly distorted in experiments were minimal.
AER data by salt and pepper-like noise or inhomogeneous
edges. The jAER software package provides de-noise filter
options but such filtering has been noticed to further distort

• *

Fig. 7. Cl layer examples with simple shapes. Top row shows the original shapes and bottom row the processed results at the Cl layer.
 Retina Events 1716. Time window 162 Retina Events 368, TIme window 108 Retin. Events 907. Time window 127

20 20 20

40 40 40

60 60 60

80 80 80

100 100 100

120 120 120

20 40 60 80 100 120 20 40 60 80 100 120 20 40 60 80 100 120
Cl units, TIme window 162 Cl units. Time window 108 Cl units, Time window 127

20 20 20

40 40 40

60 60 60

80 80 80

100 100 100

120 120 1 20
20 40 60 80 100 120 20 40 60 80 100 120

Fig. 8. Results from AER videos. Top row shows the original AER events in MATLAB of a triangle, a pool table 8-ball and a hand. Bottom row shows
the processed Cl layer images from the model.

Naturally, in the near future with more advanced retina-like
sensors of higher spatiotemporal resolutions that can
additionally process spectral information, the amount of data
and their processing load is expected to increase.
V, CONCLUSIONS
A biologically-plausible model for Gabor feature
extraction using spiking neural networks is described in this
paper. Its methodology relies on LIF neurons that have been
pre-trained with the Remote Supervision Method.
Subsequently, these neurons form a Gabor edge detection
layer and progressively the model processes these features
with alternating layers in a temporal manner. The number of
LIF neurons being created to handle incoming visual
information depends on the events being captured at a given
time window. This flexible approach closely simulates the
overall structure of the mammalian brain and exhibits
adaptation to AER data. Furthermore, the model with the
proposed methodology avoids the unnecessary complexity
that would otherwise involve thousands of additional
neurons and their respective synapses with the extra data
storage required for unwanted visual information.
The model is examined with noiseless images containing
simple shapes and then applied on retina-like data from an
AER sensor. The preliminary investigation produced
satisfactory results in the absence of noise and promising
results for the actual retina-like data. More specifically with
AER data, the model sufficiently identifies the edges of
objects. However, edges that are separated, dotted or broken
proved to be a difficult task that necessitates more advanced
AER sensors or techniques. With the current version of the
model, there is no provision for techniques that introduce or
simulate any of the Gestalt principles found in higher cortical
areas [36] and therefore these edges cannot be accurately
detected or joined.
The work presented in this paper has contributed the
following for the first time: a) Gabor filters are directly
encoded with SNN in the time domain, b) a biologically­
inspired learning technique is used to teach neurons as VI
cells for AER processing and c) a hierarchical and
biologically-inspired model with increased biological
plausibility is applied on retina-like data. Furthermore, the
model has been successful in establishing the foundation
upon which future enhancements and modifications will rely
for an advanced low power, low cost model which will
perform rapid parallel object recognition in a biologically­
inspired manner, utilising SNNs together with AER sensors.
In the near future, this approach is going to be enriched
with more advanced DVS of higher spatiotemporal
resolutions and additional spectral information that will
either be introduced by an upgraded DVS or a frame-based
device in a more elaborate schema. Moreover, by
incorporating extra layers in the hierarchy, more complex
classification problems and practical pattern recognition
scenarios will be investigated for specific AER applications
in video surveillance and navigation. Particular attention will
be given to future security projects and applications
involving the use of fast response recognition systems.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to thank the Robotics and
Computer Technology group in the University of Seville and
the Institute of Microelectronics in Seville, CSIC. Finally,
the authors thank the ABC4EU project for funding this work.
 REFERENCES
[I] S. Yamamoto and K. Kashikura, "Speed of face recognition in
humans: an event-related potentials study.," 1999.
[2] P. Lichtsteiner, C. Posch, and T. DelbrOck, "A 128x128 120dB 15/15
Latency Asynchronous Temporal Contrast Vision Sensor," iEEE J.
Solid-State Circuits, vol. 43,pp. 566-576,2008.
[3] C. Posch, D. Matolin, and R. Wohlgenannt, "A QVGA 143 dB
dynamic range frame-free PWM image sensor with lossless pixel-Ievel
video compression and time-domain CDS," in IEEE Journal of Solid­
State Circuits, 20 1 1,vol. 46,pp. 259-275.
[4] R. Berner, T. Delbruck,A. Civit-Balcells,and A. Linares-Barranco, "A
5 Meps $ 100 USB2.0 Address-Event Monitor-Sequencer Interface,"
2007 iEEE Int. Symp. Circuits Syst., 2007.
[5] D. H. Hubel and T. N. Wiesel, "Receptive fields and functional
architecture of monkey striate cortex," J. Physiol., vol. 195, no. I, pp.
2 15-243.,1967.
[6] K. Fukushima, "Neocognitron: A self organizing neural network for a
mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position," BioI.
Cybern., vol. 36,no. 4,pp. 93-202, 1980.
[7] Y. LeCun, L. Bottou, Y. Bengio, and P. Haffiler, " Gradient-based
learning applied to document recognition.," Proc. iEEE, vol. 86, pp.
2278-2324, 1998.
[8] M. Riesenhuber and T. Poggio, "Hierarchical models of object
recognition in cortex," Nat. Neurosci., no. 2( 1 1): I0 19-25, 1999.
[9] 1. A. Perez-Carrasco, c. Serrano, B. Acha, T. Serrano-Gotarredona,
and B. Linares-Barranco, "Spike-based convolutional network for real­
time processing," in Proceedings - international Conference on
Pattern Recognition, 2010,pp. 3085-3088.
[ 10] L. Camuiias-Mesa, C. Zamarreiio-Ramos, A. Linares-Barranco, A. 1.
Acosta-Jimenez, T. Serrano-Gotarredona, and B. Linares-Barranco,
"An event-driven multi-kernel convolution processor module for
event-driven vision sensors," IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 47, pp.
504-5 17,2012.
[ 1 1] O. Bichler, D. Querlioz, S. 1. Thorpe, 1. P. Bourgoin, and C. Gamrat,
"Extraction of temporally correlated features from dynamic vision
sensors with spike-timing-dependent plasticity," Neural Networks, vol.
32,pp. 339-348,2012.
[ 12] H. Markram,1. Lubke, M. Frotscher,and B. Sakmann, " Regulation of
synaptic efficacy by coincidence of postsynaptic APs and EPSPs,"
Science (80-. ).,vol. 275,no. 5297,pp. 2 13-215, 1997.
[ 13] B. Zhao, Q. Vu, H. Vu, S. Chen, and H. Tang, "A bio-inspired
feedforward system for categorization of AER motion events," in
Biomedical Circuits and Systems Conference (BioCAS), 2013, pp. 9-
12.
[ 14] S. Thorpe and J. Gautrais, "Rank order coding," Comput. Neurosci.
Trends Res., vol. 13,pp. 1 13- 1 19, 1998.
[ 15] F. Ponulak, "ReSuMe-new supervised learning method for Spiking
Neural Networks," in International Conference on Machine Learning,
ICML,2005.
[ 16] W. Gerstner and W. M. Kistler, "Mathematical formulations of
Hebbian learning," BioI. Cybern., vol. 87,pp. 404-4 15,2002.
[ 17] R. C. Froemke and Y. Dan, "Spike-timing-dependent synaptic
modification induced by natural spike trains.," Nature, vol. 4 16, pp.
433-438,2002.
[ 18] S. Marcelja, "Mathematical description of the responses of simple
cortical cells.," J. Opt. Soc. Am., vol. 70,pp. 1297-1300, 1980.
[ 19] 1. G. Daugman, "Uncertainty relation for resolution in space, spatial
frequency, and orientation optimized by two-dimensional visual
cortical filters," J. Opt. Soc. Am., vol. 2,no. 7,pp. 1 160- 1 169, 1985.
[20] M. A. Webster and R. L. De Valois, "Relationship between spatial­
frequency and orientation tuning of striate-cortex cells.," J. Opt. Soc.
Am. A., vol. 2,pp. 1 124- 1 132, 1985.
[2 1] C. J. McAdams and R. C. Reid,"Attention modulates the responses of
simple cells in monkey primary visual cortex.," J. Neurosci., vol. 25,
pp. 1 1023-1 1033,2005.
[22] N. C. Rust, O. Schwartz, 1. A. Movshon, and E. P. Simoncelli,
"Spatiotemporal elements of macaque VI receptive fields," Neuron,
vol. 46,pp. 945-956, 2005.
[23] M. P. Sceniak, M. 1. Hawken, and R. Shapley, "Contrast-dependent
changes in spatial frequency tuning of macaque VI neurons: effects of
a changing receptive field size.," J. Neurophysiol., vol. 88, pp. 1363-
1373,2002.
[24] T. Serre and M. Riesenhuber, "Realistic Modeling of Simple and
Complex Cell Tuning in the HMAX Model , and Implications for
Invariant Object Recognition in Cortex," Methods. p. -017,2004.
[25] D. Felleman and V. Essen D, "Distributed hierarchical processing in
the primate cerebral cortex," Cereb. Cortex, vol. I, no. I, pp. 1-47,
1991.
[26] 1. P. Van Kleef, S. L. Cloherty, and M. R. Ibbotson, "Complex cell
receptive fields: evidence for a hierarchical mechanism," J. Physiol.,
vol. 588,no. 18,pp. 3457-3470,2010.
[27] V. Axelrod and G. Yovel,"Hierarchical Processing of Face Viewpoint
in Human Visual Cortex," Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 32. pp. 2442-
2452,2012.
[28] E. R. Howell and R. F. Hess, 'The functional area for summation to
threshold for sinusoidal gratings.," Vision Res., vol. 18, pp. 369-374,
1978.
[29] S. J. Anderson and D. C. Burr, "Spatial summation properties of
directionally selective mechanisms in human vision.," J. Opt. Soc. Am.
A., vol. 8,pp. 1330-1339, 1991.
[30] S. Sukumar and S. J. Waugh, "Separate first- and second-order
processing is supported by spatial summation estimates at the fovea
and eccentrically," Vision Res., vol. 47,pp. 58 1-596,2007.
[3 1] J. Mutch and D. Lowe, "Object class recognition and localisation using
sparse features with limited receptive fields," int. J. Comput. Vis., vol.
80,no. I,pp. 45-57, 2008.
[32] E. Niebur and C. Koch, "A model for the neuronal implementation of
selective visual attention based on temporal correlation among
neurons," J. Comput. Neurosci., vol. I,pp. 141- 158, 1994.
[33] I. C. Lin, D. Xing, and R. Shapley, "Integrate-and-fire vs Poisson
models of LGN input to VI cortex: Noisier inputs reduce orientation
selectivity," J. Comput. Neurosci., vol. 33,pp. 559-572,2012.
[34] T. Delbruck and L. Longinotti, ')AER "
http://sourceforge.netlpl}aerlwikiIHomel, 2014.
[35] T. Serrano-Gotarredona and B. Linares-Barranco, "A 128,x 128 1.5%
contrast sensitivity 0.9% FPN 3 J.lS latency 4 mW asynchronous frame-
free dynamic vision sensor using transimpedance preamplifiers," IEEE
J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 48,pp. 827-838,2013.
[36] W. Ehrenstein, L. Spillmann, and V. Sarris, "Gestalt issues in modem
neuroscience," Axiomathes, vol. 13,pp. 433-458, 2003.