Humans process visual scenes selectively and sequentially using attention. Central to models of human visual attention is the saliency map. We propose a hierarchical visual architecture that operates on a saliency map and uses a novel attention mechanism to sequentially focus on salient regions and take additional glimpses within those regions. The architecture is motivated by human visual attention, and is used for multi-label image classification on a novel multiset task, demonstrating that it achieves high precision and recall while localizing objects with its attention. Unlike conventional multi-label image classification models, the model supports multiset prediction due to a reinforcement-learning based training process that allows for arbitrary label permutation and multiple instances per label.
@cite_33: This review focuses on covert attention and how it alters early vision. I explain why attention is considered a selective process, the constructs of covert attention, spatial endogenous and exogenous attention, and feature-based attention. I explain how in the last 25 years research on attention has characterized the effects of covert attention on spatial filters and how attention influences the selection of stimuli of interest. This review includes the effects of spatial attention on discriminability and appearance in tasks mediated by contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution; the effects of feature-based attention on basic visual processes, and a comparison of the effects of spatial and feature-based attention. The emphasis of this review is on psychophysical studies, but relevant electrophysiological and neuroimaging studies and models regarding how and where neuronal responses are modulated are also discussed.
@cite_8: A partial report procedure was used to test the ability of observers to split attention over noncontiguous locations. Observers reported the identity of 2 targets that appeared within a 5 X 5 stimulus array, and cues (validity = 80 ) informed them of the 2 most likely target locations. On invalid trials, 1 of the targets appeared directly in between the cued locations. Experiments 1, la, and 2 showed a strong accuracy advantage at cued locations compared with intervening ones. This effect was larger when the cues were arranged horizontally rather than vertically. Experiment 3 suggests that this effect of cue orientation reflects an advantage for processing targets that appear in different hemifields. Experiments 4 and 4a suggest that the primary mechanism supporting the flexible deployment of spatial attention is the suppression of interference from stimuli at unattended locations. There is a substantial body of research showing that when observers direct attention to specific parts of the visual field, information processing is facilitated at attended locations relative to unattended locations. A basic question is how flexibly attention can be deployed over space. Most models of spatial attention have assumed that attention is allocated over contiguous regions of space (e.g., Eriksen & Yeh, 1985; Posner, Snyder, & Davidson, 1980), and various empirical tests have supported this claim (e.g., Eriksen & Yeh, 1985; Heinze, Luck, Muente, Goes, Mangun, & Hillyard, 1994; McCormick & Klein, 1990; Pan & Eriksen, 1993; Posner, Snyder, & Davidson, 1980). However, more recent evidence has suggested that allocation of attention to noncontiguous regions is possible. Kramer and Hahn (1995) and Hahn and Kramer (1998) studied the influence of distractor compatibility at locations directly in between two cued locations and found that under certain conditions performance was unaffected by the distractors. In particular, they noted that when the distractors were presented by removing selected parts of a premask (the nononset condition), observers were able to suppress their influence. However, when the intervening distractors were presented as sudden-onset stimuli, distractor compatibility effects emerged. The investigators concluded that observers could divide attention effectively between noncontiguous locations but that this split focus was disrupted when new perceptual objects appeared in the intervening locations. They used a very strict criterion for evidence of split attention, however—namely, that distractors have absolutely no effect on target processing. The fact
@cite_29: 
@cite_9: Abstract This article reviews the past 25 years of research on eye movements (1986–2011). Emphasis is on three oculomotor behaviors: gaze control, smooth pursuit and saccades, and on their interactions with vision. Focus over the past 25 years has remained on the fundamental and classical questions: What are the mechanisms that keep gaze stable with either stationary or moving targets? How does the motion of the image on the retina affect vision? Where do we look – and why – when performing a complex task? How can the world appear clear and stable despite continual movements of the eyes? The past 25 years of investigation of these questions has seen progress and transformations at all levels due to new approaches (behavioral, neural and theoretical) aimed at studying how eye movements cope with real-world visual and cognitive demands. The work has led to a better understanding of how prediction, learning and attention work with sensory signals to contribute to the effective operation of eye movements in visually rich environments.
@cite_45: Attention allows us to monitor objects or regions of visual space and select information from them for report or storage. Classical theories of attention assumed a single focus of selection but many everyday activities, such as video games, navigating busy intersections, or watching over children at a swimming pool, require attention to multiple regions of interest. Laboratory tracking tasks have indeed demonstrated the ability to track four or more targets simultaneously. Although the mechanisms by which attention maintains contact with several targets are not yet established, recent studies have identified several characteristics of the tracking process, including properties defining a ‘trackable’ target, the maximum number of targets that can be tracked, and the hemifield independence of the tracking process. This research also has implications for computer vision, where there is a growing demand for multiple-object tracking.
Visual attention can be classified into and components. Covert attention precedes eye movements, and is intuitively used to monitor the environment and guide eye movements to salient regions @cite_33 @cite_9 . Two particular functions of covert attention motivate the Gaussian attention mechanism proposed below: noise exclusion, which modifies perceptual filters to enhance the signal portion of the stimulus and mitigate the noise; and distractor suppression, which refers to suppressing the representation strength outside an attention area @cite_33 . Further inspiring the proposed attention mechanism is evidence from cueing @cite_8 , multiple object tracking @cite_45 , and fMRI @cite_29 studies, which indicate that covert attention can be deployed to , regions that and can be conceptually viewed as multiple "spotlights".