Bayesian combination of ambiguous shape cues

Journal of Vision

Volumn 4, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 921-929

  Adams, Wendy J ^a   Mamassian, Pascal ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bayes; Bayesian; Cue combination; Depth; Disparity; Stereo; Texture

Indexed keywords

AMBIGUITY; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; BAYES THEOREM; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LINEAR SYSTEM; MODULATION; MONOCULAR VISION; OBSERVATION; STEREOSCOPIC VISION; SURFACE PROPERTY; VISUAL INFORMATION; VISUAL STIMULATION; BINOCULAR VISION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY;

BAYES THEOREM; CUES; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; VISION DISPARITY; VISION, BINOCULAR;

EID: 27344444326     PISSN: 15347362     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/4.10.7     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Backus, B. T., & Banks, M. S. (1999). Estimator reliability and distance scaling in stereoscopic slant perception. Perception, 28, 217-242.
2. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 443-446.
3. Braunstein, M. L., Anderson, G. J., & Riefer, D. M. (1982). The use of occlusion to resolve ambiguity in parallel projections. Perception & Psychophysics, 31, 261-267.
4. 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.
5. Clark, J. J., & Yuille, A. L. (1990). Data fusion for sensory information processing systems. Boston, MA: Kluwer.
6. Dosher, B. A., Sperling, G., & Wurst, S. (1986). Tradeoffs between stereopsis and proximity luminance covariance as determinants of perceived 3D structure. Vision Research, 26, 973-990.
7. Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2002). Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature, 415, 429-433.
8. Frisby, J. P., Buckley, D., Wishart, K. A., Porrill, J., Garding, J., & Mayhew, J. E. W. (1995). Interaction of stereo and texture cues in the perception of 3-dimensional steps. Vision Research, 35, 1463-1472.
9. 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.
10. Jacobs, R. A. (1999). Optimal integration of texture and motion cues to depth. Vision Research, 39, 3621-3629.
11. Johnston, E. B. (1991). Systematic distortions of shape from stereopsis. Vision Research, 31, 1351-1360.
12. Johnston, E. B., Cumming, B. G., & Landy, M. S. (1994). Integration of stereopsis and motion shape cues. Vision Research, 34, 2259-2275.
13. Knill, D. C. (1998). Discriminating surface slant from texture: Comparing human and ideal observers. Vision Research, 38, 1683-1711.
14. Landy, M. S., Maloney, L. T., Johnston, E. B., & Young, M. (1995). Measurement and modelling of depth cue combination: In defense of weak fusion. Vision Research, 35, 389-412.
15. Langer, M. S., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2001). A prior for global convexity in local shape-from-shading. Perception, 30, 403-410.
16. Li, A., & Zaidi, Q. (2001). Information limitations in perception of shape from shading. Vision Research, 41, 1519-1534.
17. Livingstone, M. & Hubel, D. (1988). Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth - anatomy, physiology, and perception. Science, 240, 740-749.
18. Maloney, L. T. (2002). Statistical decision theory and biological vision. In D. Heyer & R. Mausfeld (Eds.), Perception and the physical world: Psychological and philosophical issues in perception (pp. 145-189). New York: Wiley.
19. Mamassian, P., & Landy, M. S. (1998). Observer biases in the 3D interpretation of line drawings. Vision Research, 38, 2817-2832.
20. Nakayama, K., & Shimojo, S. (1992). Experiencing and perceiving visual surfaces. Science, 257, 1357-1363.
21. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The Video Toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Tranforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442.
22. Proffitt, D. R., Bertenthal, B. I., & Roberts, R. J., Jr. (1984). The role of occlusion in reducing multistability in moving point-light displays. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 315-323.
23. Richards, W. (1985). Structure from stereo and motion. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 2, 343-349.
24. van Damme, W., & Brenner, E. (1997). The distance used for scaling disparities is the same as the one used for scaling retinal size. Vision Research, 37, 757-764.
25. van Ee, R., Adams, W. J., & Mamassian, P. (2003). Bayesian modelling of cue interaction: Bi-stability in stereoscopic slant perception, Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 20, 1398-1406.
26. Watt, S. J., Akeley, K., & Banks, M. S. (2003). Focus cues to display distance affect perceived depth from disparity, [Abstract]. Journal of Vision, 3(9), 66a. http://www.journalofvision.org/3/9/66/, doi:10.1167/3.9.66.
27. Watt, S. J., Banks, M. S., Ernst, M. O., & Zumer, J. M. (2002). Screen cues to flatness do affect 3d percepts [Abstract]. Journal of Vision, 2(7), 297a, http://www.journalofvision.org/2/7/297/, doi:10.1167/2.7.297.
28. Zeki, S. M. (1978). Functional specialization in the visual cortex of the monkey. Nature, 274, 423-428.