Vision Transformers Learn Gestalt-Like Figure-Ground Cues from Natural Images

Vision Transformers trained only on image classification routinely transfer to tasks that demand spatial understanding, yet they receive no spatial supervision during pretraining. We ask where and how robustly such structure is encoded. Probing a frozen ViT-B/16 layerwise for two complementary properties, local patch boundaries (BSDS500) and per-patch depth (NYU Depth V2), reveals a clear hierarchy: boundary structure becomes linearly decodable at layers 5-6 (AP = 0.833), while depth, which requires integrating global cues, peaks two to three layers later at layer 8 (MAE = 0.0875). Both signals collapse at the final classification layer, and random-weight controls confirm the encodings are learned rather than architectural. Causal interventions add specificity: ablating the single direction a linear depth probe reads degrades depth decoding by up to 165%, while ablating any other direction changes it by less than 1%. Targeted activation patching along that direction shows the depth signal is partially re-derived at each layer rather than passively carried in the residual stream, with mid-layer interventions persisting most strongly downstream. The result is that a classification-trained ViT develops an actively maintained spatial hierarchy that mirrors the early-to-late progression observed in the primate visual cortex.

Vision transformers (ViTs) have become the de facto standard for image encoding across many perception tasks. Despite their empirical success, it remains mechanistically unclear how they encode low-level features, given their lack of inductive biases: ViTs process information globally rather than relying on local structure. Biological visual systems, in contrast, build low-level features, such as orientation selectivity in the primary visual cortex, by combining information from small, localized regions of the visual field. These features are general-purpose representations, shared and required across multiple specialized neural pathways, unlike higher-level, task-specific semantic features. This raises the question if such biologically-grounded features arise in ViTs. In this work, we systematically study how orientation selectivity emerges in ViTs by introducing a suite of neuroscience-inspired metrics: representational similarity score (RSS), orientation recruitment score (ORS), and orientation tuning bandwidth to quantify how orientation is encoded in representational geometry and as a function of model depth. Through extensive analysis, we find that: (1) the training paradigm is the strongest determinant of orientation selectivity, with models sharing an objective, peaking at comparable relative depths regardless of scale (2) many units are orientation-selective early in training, with early-to-middle layers recruiting more such units over time, while deeper layers lose selectivity and broaden their tuning toward semantic encoding and (3) our metrics offer a mechanistic heuristic for how many layers to unfreeze for best downstream generalization. Our framework presents a way to track biologically-grounded features during ViT training, probes how desired properties are encoded in transformer representations, and builds a systematic understanding of how ViTs generalize across tasks.

In computational vision science, Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) have emerged as a popular model of biological vision because of the alignment they can exhibit with neural and behavioral data in humans and animals. However, it remains unclear to what extent this alignment persists for visual tasks that extend beyond the canonical object recognition paradigm based on well defined semantic content. In this study, we diverge from the common object-centric view by focusing on another aspect of vision: texture perception. We consider textures of different complexity generated with three different algorithms from the same source images. Using a rank-based statistic, we quantify the information encoded in the internal representations of a CNN and three Vision Transformers (ViTs), and we compare the similarity of these representations to those inferred from human psychophysics data. We find that the representation of textures is aligned in different ViTs, but not between the ViTs and the CNN; that ViTs form similar representations for textures of different complexity; that human performance in recognizing textures can be better predicted from ViTs representations rather than CNN representations. Taken together, these results suggest that ViTs may capture more faithfully than CNNs how texture patterns are visually processed by humans, and that the representations of texture stimuli in computational models may be driven by the network architecture.