Papers › ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves...
ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustness
Robert Geirhos, Patricia Rubisch, Claudio Michaelis, Matthias Bethge, Felix A. Wichmann, Wieland Brendel
Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are commonly thought to recognise objects by learning increasingly complex representations of object shapes. Some recent studies suggest a more important role of image textures. We here put these conflicting hypotheses to a quantitative test by evaluating CNNs and human observers on images with a texture-shape cue conflict. We show that ImageNet-trained CNNs are strongly biased towards recognising textures rather than shapes, which is in stark contrast to human behavioural evidence and reveals fundamentally different classification strategies. We then demonstrate that the same standard architecture (ResNet-50) that learns a texture-based representation on ImageNet is able to learn a shape-based representation instead when trained on "Stylized-ImageNet", a stylized version of ImageNet. This provides a much better fit for human behavioural performance in our well-controlled psychophysical lab setting (nine experiments totalling 48,560 psychophysical trials across 97 observers) and comes with a number of unexpected emergent benefits such as improved object detection performance and previously unseen robustness towards a wide range of image distortions, highlighting advantages of a shape-based representation.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="1811.12231")
Code
Syntology Ran 0 of 6 code samples harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper; 6 have no recorded run.
By repository: community (archive-listed): 6 samples from 2 repositories, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
6 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 6 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 6 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
c0af04d826190380 · report
fab2f87b04e9888a · report
586aecacc7ce053c · report
ebcb545a49bf2ee2 · report
fc281a9b16611bd2 · report
2c55864d4a9f367c · report
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Domain Generalization | ImageNet-A | Stylized ImageNet (ResNet-50) | Top-1 accuracy % | 2.3 | #38 of 39 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | ImageNet-C | Stylized ImageNet (ResNet-50) | mean Corruption Error (mCE) | 69.3 | #39 of 47 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | ImageNet-R | Stylized ImageNet (ResNet-50) | Top-1 Error Rate | 58.5 | #34 of 39 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN_IN_IN) | Accuracy - All Images | 39.2 | #40 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN_IN_IN) | Accuracy - Clean Images | 44.6 | #40 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN_IN_IN) | Accuracy - Corrupted Images | 32.4 | #40 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN_IN) | Accuracy - All Images | 38.2 | #49 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN_IN) | Accuracy - Clean Images | 42.7 | #49 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN_IN) | Accuracy - Corrupted Images | 32.5 | #49 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN) | Accuracy - All Images | 25.3 | #86 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN) | Accuracy - Clean Images | 30 | #86 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | ResNet-50 (SIN) | Accuracy - Corrupted Images | 20.4 | #86 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Object Recognition | shape bias | AlexNet | shape bias | 42.9 | #11 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Object Recognition | shape bias | GoogLeNet | shape bias | 31.2 | #15 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Object Recognition | shape bias | ResNet-50 | shape bias | 22.1 | #17 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Object Recognition | shape bias | VGG-16 | shape bias | 17.2 | #18 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections