Slant from texture and disparity cues: Optimal cue combination

Journal of Vision

Volumn 4, Issue 12, 2004, Pages 967-992

  Hillis, James M ^a   Watt, Simon J ^b   Landy, Michael S ^c   Banks, Martin S ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian perception; Cue combination; Depth perception; Stereopsis; Texture gradient

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; BAYES THEOREM; BINOCULAR VISION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; NORMAL HUMAN; RELIABILITY; STEREOSCOPIC VISION; SURFACE PROPERTY; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION; VISUAL INFORMATION; VISUAL STIMULATION; VISUAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

CUES; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; VISION DISPARITY; VISION, BINOCULAR;

EID: 16844385170     PISSN: 15347362     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/4.12.1     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Alais, D., & Burr, D. (2004). The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Current Biology, 14, 257-262.
2. Backus, B. T., & Banks, M. S. (1999). Estimator reliability and distance scaling in stereoscopic slant perception. Perception, 28, 217-242.
3. Backus, B. T., Banks, M. S., van Ee R., & Crowell, J. A. (1999). Horizontal and vertical disparity, eye position, and stereoscopic slant perception. Vision Research, 39, 1143-1170.
4. Banks, M. S., Gepshtein, S., & Landy, M. S. (2004). Why is spatial stereoresolution so low? Journal of Neuroscience, 24, 2077-2089.
5. Banks, M. S., Hooge, I. T. C., & Backus, B. T. (2001). Perceiving slant about a horizontal axis from stereopsis. Journal of Vision, 1(2), 55-78, http://journalofvision.org/1/2/1/, doi:10.1167/1.2.1.
6. Battaglia, P. W., Jacobs, R. A., & Aslin, R. N. (2003). Bayesian integration of visual and auditory signals for spatial localization. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 20, 1391-1397.
7. Blake, A., Bülthoff, H. H., & Sheinberg, D. (1993). Shape from texture: Ideal observers and human psychophysics. Vision Research, 33, 1723-1737.
8. Bradshaw, M. F., Glennerster, A., & Rogers, B. J. (1996). The effect of display size on disparity scaling from differential perspective and vergence cues. Vision Research, 36, 1255-1264.
9. Bradshaw, M. F., Hibbard, P. B., van der Willigen, R., Watt, S. J., & Simpson, P. J. (2002). The stereoscopic anisotropy affects manual pointing. Spatial Vision, 15, 443-458.
10. Buckley, D., & Frisby, J. P. (1993). Interaction of stereo, texture and outline cues in the shape perception of three-dimensional ridges. Vision Research, 33, 919-933.
11. Burt, P., & Julesz, B. (1980). A disparity gradient limit for binocular fusion. Science, 208, 615-617.
12. Cochran, W. G. (1937). Problems arising in the analysis of a series of similar experiments. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 4(Suppl.), 102-118.
13. Cutting, J, E., & Millard, R. T. (1984). Three gradients and the perception of flat and curved surfaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 198-216.
14. de Berg, M., van Kreveld, M., Overmars, M., & Schwarzkopf, O. (2000). Computational geometry: Algorithms and applications (2nd Ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag.
15. Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2002). Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature, 415, 429-433.
16. Frisby, J. P., Buckley, D., & Horsman, J. M. (1995). Integration of stereo, texture, and outline cues during pinhole viewing of real ridge-shaped objects and stereograms of ridges. Perception, 24, 181-198.
17. Gårding, J., Porrill, J., Mayhew, J. E. W., & Frisby, J. P. (1995). Stereopsis, vertical disparity and relief transformations. Vision Research, 35, 703-722.
18. Gepshtein, S,, & Banks, M. S. (2003). Viewing geometry determines how vision and haptics combine in size perception. Current Biology, 13, 483-488.
19. Gillam, B., & Ryan, C. (1992). Perspective, orientation disparity, and anisotropy in stereoscopic slant perception. Perception, 21, 427-439.
20. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1074). Signal detection theory and psychophysics, New York: Robert E. Krieger.
21. Heath, G. G. (1956), The influence of visual acuity on accommodative responses of the human eye. American Journal of Optometry, 33, 513-523.
22. Helmholtz, H. (1910). Physiological optics. New York: Dover.
23. Hillis, J. M., & Banks, M. S. (2001). Are corresponding points fixed? Vision Research, 41, 2457-2473.
24. Hillis, J. M., Ernst, M. O., Banks, M. S., & Landy, M. S. (2002). Combining sensory information: Mandatory fusion within, but not between, senses. Science, 298, 1627-1630.
25. Howard, I. P., & Kaneko, H. (1994). Relative shear disparities and the perception of surface inclination. Vision Research, 34, 2505-2517.
26. Howard, I. P., & Rogers, B. J. (2002). Seeing in depth. Volume 2: Depth perception. Toronto: I Porteous.
27. Jacobs, R. A. (1999). Optimal integration of texture and motion cues to depth. Vision Research, 39, 3621-3629.
28. Johnston, E. B. (1991). Systematic distortions of shape from stereopsis. Vision Research, 31, 1351-1360.
29. Johnston, E. B., Cumming, B. G., & Parker, A. J. (1993). Integrations of depth modules: Stereopsis and texture. Vision Research, 33, 813-826. [Pub-Med]
30. Kersten, D., Mamassian, P., & Yuille, A. (2004). Object perception as Bayesian inference. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 271-304.
31. Knill, D. C. (1998a). Surface orientation from texture: Ideal observers, generic observers and the information content of texture cues. Vision Research, 38, 1655-1682.
32. Knill, D. C. (1998b). Discrimination of planar surface slant from texture: Human and ideal observers compared. Vision Research, 38, 1683-1711.
33. Knill, D. C., & Saunders, J. A. (2003). Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgments of surface slant? Vision Research, 43, 2539-2558.
34. Körding, K. P., & Wolpert, D. M. (2004). Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning. Nature, 427, 244-247.
35. Landy, M. S., & Kojima, H, (2001). Ideal cue combination for localizing texture-defined edges. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 18, 2307-2320.
36. Landy, M. S., Maloney, L. T., Johnston, E. B., & Young, M. J. (1995), Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: In defense of weak fusion. Vision Research, 35, 389-412.
37. Legge, G. E. (1984). Binocular contrast summation I. Detection and discrimination. Vision Research, 24, 373-383.
38. Mamassian, P., Landy, M. S., & Maloney, L. T. (2002). Bayesian modeling of visual perception. In R. P. N. Rao, B. A. Olshausen, & M. S. Lewicki (Eds.), Probabilistic models of the brain: perception and neural function (pp. 13-36). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Mather, G., & Smith, D. R. (2002). Blur discrimination and its relation to blur-mediated depth perception. Perception, 31, 1211-1219.
40. Ogle, K. N. (1950). Researches in binocular vision. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders.
41. Oruc, I., Maloney, L. T., & Landy, M. S. (2003). Weighted linear cue combination with possibly correlated error. Vision Research, 43, 2451-2468.
42. Rogers, B. J., & Bradshaw, M. F. (1995). Disparity scaling and the perception of frontoparallel surfaces. Perception, 24, 155-179.
43. van Beers, R. J., Sittig, A. C., & Denier van der Gon, J. J. (1998). The precision of proprioceptive position sense. Experimental Brain Research, 122, 367-377.
44. van Beers, R. J., Wolpert, D. M., & Haggard, P. (2002). When feeling is more important than seeing in sensorimotor adaptation. Current Biology, 12, 834-837.
45. van Ee, R., & Erkelens, C. J. (1998). Temporal aspects of stereoscopic slant estimation: An evaluation and extension of Howard and Kaneko's theory. Vision Research, 38, 3871-3882.
46. Young, M. J., Landy, M. S., & Maloney, L. T. (1993). A perturbation analysis of dept perception from combinations of texture and motion cues. Vision Research, 33, 2685-2696.