Literature DB >> 9747503

Discrimination of planar surface slant from texture: human and ideal observers compared.

D C Knill1.   

Abstract

In order to quantify the ability of the human visual system to use texture information to perceive planar surface orientation, I measured subjects' ability to discriminate planar surface slant (angle away from the fronto-parallel) for a variety of different types of textures and in a number of different viewing conditions. I measured the subjects' discrimination performance as a function of surface slant, field of view size and surface texture structure. I compared the subjects' performance with that of ideal observers derived for each of the available texture cues--texel position, scaling and foreshortening. The results can be summarized by four points: (i) subjects' discrimination performance improves dramatically with increasing surface slant, tracking the performance of the ideal observers; (ii) subjects can integrate texture information over a large range of visual angles; (iii) comparisons between human subjects and ideal observers show that the human observers rely to some degree on foreshortening information; and (iv) similar comparisons show that in using foreshortening information, subjects rely to some extent on a prior assumption of isotropy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9747503     DOI: 10.1016/s0042-6989(97)00325-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  27 in total

1.  Bayesian natural selection and the evolution of perceptual systems.

Authors:  Wilson S Geisler; Randy L Diehl
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2002-04-29       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Focus cues affect perceived depth.

Authors:  Simon J Watt; Kurt Akeley; Marc O Ernst; Martin S Banks
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Uncertainty and invariance in the human visual cortex.

Authors:  Bosco S Tjan; Vaia Lestou; Zoe Kourtzi
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-05-24       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  The dynamics of multimodal integration: The averaging diffusion model.

Authors:  Brandon M Turner; Juan Gao; Scott Koenig; Dylan Palfy; James L McClelland
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-12

5.  Optimal combination of environmental cues and path integration during navigation.

Authors:  Lori A Sjolund; Jonathan W Kelly; Timothy P McNamara
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-01

6.  Visual-haptic cue integration with spatial and temporal disparity during pointing movements.

Authors:  Sascha Serwe; Konrad P Körding; Julia Trommershäuser
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-03-04       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Fusion of visual cues is not mandatory in children.

Authors:  Marko Nardini; Rachael Bedford; Denis Mareschal
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-09-13       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Sounds exaggerate visual shape.

Authors:  Timothy D Sweeny; Emmanuel Guzman-Martinez; Laura Ortega; Marcia Grabowecky; Satoru Suzuki
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2012-05-25

9.  Multisensory oddity detection as bayesian inference.

Authors:  Timothy Hospedales; Sethu Vijayakumar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Cue integration outside central fixation: a study of grasping in depth.

Authors:  Hal S Greenwald; David C Knill
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2009-02-10       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.