A stereo advantage in generalizing over changes in viewpoint on object recognition tasks

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 68, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 1082-1093

  Bennett, David J ^a   Vuong, Quoc C ^b  

^a BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL CYBERNETICS   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33947546941     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03193711     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. BENNETT, D. J. (in press). Does an estimate of environmental size precede size scaling on a form comparison task? Perception.
2. BIEDERMAN, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115-147.
3. BÜLTHOFF, H. H. (1991). Shape from X: Psychophysics and computation. In M. S. Landy & J. A. Movshon (Eds.), Computational models of visual processing (pp. 305-330). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. BÜLTHOFF, H. H., & EDELMAN, S. Y. (1992). Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 89, 60-64.
5. BÜLTHOFF, H. H., EDELMAN, S. Y., & TARR, M. J. (1995). How are three-dimensional objects represented in the brain? Cerebral Cortex, 5, 247-260.
6. BÜLTHOFF, H. H., & MALLOT, H. A. (1988). Integration of depth modules: Stereo and shading. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 5, 1749-1758.
7. BURKE, D. (2005). Combining disparate views of objects: Viewpoint costs are reduced by stereopsis. Visual Cognition, 12, 705-719.
8. EDELMAN, S. [Y.], & BÜLTHOFF, H. H. (1992). Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects. Vision Research, 32, 2385-2400.
9. FARAH, M. J., ROCHLIN, R., & KLEIN, K. L. (1994). Orientation invariance and geometric primitives in shape recognition. Cognitive Science, 18, 325-344.
10. HAYWARD, W. G. (1998). Effects of outline shape in object recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 427-440.
11. HUMPHREY, G. K., & KHAN, S. C. (1992). Recognising novel views of three-dimensional objects. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 46, 170-190.
12. JOLICŒUR, P. (1985). The time to name disoriented natural objects. Memory & Cognition, 13, 289-303.
13. LANDY, M. S., MALONEY, L. T., JOHNSTON, E. B., & YOUNG, M. (1995). Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: In defense of weak fusion. Vision Research, 35, 389-412.
14. LIU, Z., KNILL, D. C., & KERSTEN, D. (1995). Object classification for human and ideal observers. Vision Research, 35, 549-568.
15. MARR, D. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco: Freeman.
16. MARK, D., & NISHIHARA, H. K. (1978). Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 200, 269-294.
17. NEWHOUSE, M., & UTTAL, W. R. (1982). Distribution of stereoanomalies in the general population. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 20, 48-50
18. PATTERSON, R., & FOX, R. (1984). The effect of testing method on stereoanomaly. Vision Research, 24, 403-408.
19. POGGIO, T., & EDELMAN, S. [Y.] (1990). A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects. Nature, 343, 263-266.
20. ROCK, I., & DIVITA, J. (1987). A case of viewer-centered object perception. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 280-293.
21. SINHA, P., & POGGIO, T. (1994). View-based strategies for 3D object recognition (AI Memo No. 1518, CBCL Paper No. 106). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
22. STONE, J. V. (1999). Object recognition: View specificity and motion specificity. Vision Research, 39, 4032-4044.
23. TARR, M. J. (1995). Rotating objects to recognize them: A case study of the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 55-82.
24. TARR, M. J., & PINKER, S. (1989). Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 233-282.
25. TARR, M. J., WILLIAMS, P., HAYWARD, W. G., & GAUTHIER, I. (1998). Three-dimensional object recognition is viewpoint dependent. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 275-277.
26. ULLMAN, S. (1979). The interpretation of visual motion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. ULLMAN, S., & BASRI, R. (1991). Recognition by linear combination of models. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis & Machine Intelligence, 13, 992-1006.
28. UTTAL, W. R., DAVIS, N. S., & WELKE, C. (1994). Stereoscopic perception with brief exposures. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 599-604.
29. VUONG, Q. C., & TARR, M. J. (2006). Structural similarity and spatio-temporal noise effects on learning dynamic novel objects. Perception, 35, 497-510.
30. WATT, S. J., AKELEY, K., ERNST, M. O., & BANKS, M. S. (2005). Focus cues affect perceived depth. Journal of Vision, 5, 834-862.
31. WILLIAMS, P., & TARR, M. J. (1999). Orientation-specific possibility priming for novel three-dimensional objects. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 963-976.