Natural-scene statistics predict how the figure-ground cue of convexity affects human depth perception

Journal of Neuroscience

Volumn 30, Issue 21, 2010, Pages 7269-7280

  Burge, Johannes ^a   Fowlkes, Charless C ^c   Banks, Martin S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; DECISION MAKING; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; METRIC SYSTEM; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY; SURFACE PROPERTY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VISUAL CORTEX;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CUES; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FIELD DEPENDENCE-INDEPENDENCE; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; NATURE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; VISION DISPARITY; VISION, OCULAR;

EID: 77951194272     PISSN: 02706474     EISSN: 15292401     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5551-09.2010     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Alais D, Burr D (2004) The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal cross-modal integration. Curr Biol 14:257-262. (Pubitemid 38215356)
2. Backus BT, Banks MS, van Ee R, Crowell JA (1999) Horizontal and vertical disparity, eye position, and stereoscopic slant perception. Vision Res 39:1143-1170.
3. Bakin JS, Nakayama K, Gilbert CD (2000) Visual responses in monkey areas V1 and V2 to three-dimensional surface configurations. J Neurosci 20:8188-8198.
4. Barlow HB (1961) Possible principles underlying the transformation of sensory messages. In: Sensory communication (Rosenblith WA, ed), pp 217- 234. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
5. Berkeley G 1709 An essay toward a new theory of vision. Dublin: Pepyat.
6. Bertamini M, Martinovic J, Wuerger SM (2008) Integration of ordinal and metric cues in depth processing. J Vis 8:1-12.
7. Bruce V, Green PR, Georgeson MA (2003) Visual perception: Physiology, psychology, and ecology. New York: Psychology.
8. Brunswik E, Kamiya J (1953) Ecological cue validity of "Proximity" and of other gestalt factors. Am J Psychol 66:20-32.
9. Burge J, Peterson MA, Palmer SE (2005) Ordinal configural cues combine with metric disparity in depth perception. J Vis 5:534-542. (Pubitemid 41519245)
10. Cormack LK, Landers DD, Ramakrishnan S (1997) Element density and the efficiency of binocular matching. J Opt Soc Am 14:723-730.
11. Driver J, Baylis GC (1996) Edge-assignment and figure-ground organization in short term visual matching. Cogn Psychol 31:248-306. (Pubitemid 126375680)
12. Elder JH, Goldberg RM (2002) Ecological statistics of Gestalt laws for the perceptual organization of contours. J Vis 2:324-353.
13. Engel SA, Remus DA, Sainath R (2006) Motion from occlusion. J Vis 6:649-652.
14. Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415:429-433.
15. Fowlkes CC, Martin D, Malik J (2007) Local figure/ground cues are valid for natural images. J Vis 7:1-9.
16. Geisler WS (2008) Visual perception and the statistical properties of natural scenes. Annu Rev Psychol 59:10.1-10.26.
17. Geisler WS, Perry JS, Super BJ, Gallogly DP (2001) Edge co-occurrence in natural images predicts contour grouping performance. Vision Res 41:711-724.
18. Ghahramani Z, Wolpert DM, Jordan MI (1997) Computational models of sensorimotor integration. In: Self-organization, computational maps and motor control (Morasso PG, Sanguineti V, eds), pp 117-147. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
19. Gibson BS, Peterson MA (1994) Does orientation-independent object recognition precede orientation-dependent recognition? Evidence form a cuing paradigm. J Exp Psychol 28:299-316.
20. Gillam BJ, Anderson BL, Rizwi F (2009) Failure of facial configural cues to alter metric stereoscopic depth. J Vis 9:3,1-5.
21. Green DM, Swets JA (1966) Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
22. Hillis JM, Watt SJ, Landy MS, Banks MS (2004) Slant from texture and disparity cues: optimal cue combination. J Vis 4:967-992.
23. Hoiem D, Efros AA, Hebert M (2005) Geometric context from a single image. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision. Beijing, October.
24. Howard IP, Rogers BJ (2002) Seeing in depth. Vol 2. Depth perception. New York: Oxford UP.
25. Howe CQ, Purves D (2002) Range image statistics can explain the anomalous perception of length. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:13184-13188.
26. Huang J, Lee AB, Mumford D (2000) Statistics of range images. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computational Vision and Pattern Recognition, Vol 1, pp 324-331. IEEE: Hilton Head Island, SC.
27. Kanizsa G, Gerbino W (1976) Convexity and symmetry in figure-ground organization. In: Vision and artifact (Henle M, ed), pp 25-32. New York: Springer.
28. Knill DC, Saunders JA (2003) Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information to slant? Vision Res 43:2539-2558.
29. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ (1992) Surface shape and curvatures scales. Image Vis Comput 10:557-565.
30. Landy MS, Maloney LT, Johnston EB, Young M (1995) Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: in defense of weak fusion. Vision Res 35:389-412.
31. Levitt H (1971) Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Opt Soc Am 49:467-477.
32. Mamassian P, Goutcher R (2001) Prior knowledge on the illumination position. Cognition 81:B1-B9.
33. Martin D, Fowlkes CC, Tal D, Malik J (2001) A database of human segmented natural images and its application to evaluating segmentation algorithms and measuring ecological statistics. Vancouver: ICCV.
34. Mather G, Smith DR (2000) Depth cue integration: stereopsis and image blur. Vision Res 40:3501-3506.
35. McKee SP, Levi DM, Bowne SF (1990) The imprecision of stereopsis. Vision Res 30:1763-1779.
36. Metzger F (1953) Gesetze des Sehens. Frankfurt: Waldemar Kramer.
37. Morgan MJ, Watamaniuk SN, McKee SP (2000) The use of an implicit standard for measuring discrimination thresholds. Vision Res 40:2341-2349.
38. Olshausen BA, Field DJ (1996) Emergence of simple-cell receptive field properties by learning a sparse code for natural images. Nature 381:607-609.
39. Orban GA (2008) Higher order visual processing in macaque extrastriate cortex. Physiol Rev 88:59-89.
40. Palmer SE (1999) Vision science: photons to phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books, MIT.
41. Peterson MA, Skow E (2008) Inhibitory competition between shape properties in figure-ground perception. J Exp Psychol 32:251-267.
42. Peterson MA, Harvey EM, Weidenbacher HJ (1991) Shape recognition contributions to figure-ground organization: which route counts? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 17:1075-1089.
43. Poggio GF, Gonzalez F, Krause F (1988) Stereoscopic mechanisms in monkey visual cortex: binocular correlation and disparity selectivity. J Neurosci 8:4531-4550.
44. Potetz B, Lee TS (2003) Statistical correlations between 2D images and 3D structures in natural scenes. J Opt Soc Am 20:1292-1303.
45. Qiu FT, von der Heydt R (2005) Figure and ground in the visual cortex: V2 combines stereoscopic cues with Gestalt rules. Neuron 47:155-166.
46. Ren X, Malik J (2002) A probabilistic multi-scale model for contour completion based on image statistics. Vol 1, pp 312-327. Copenhagen: ECCV.
47. Ringach DL (1996) Binocular eye movements caused by the perception of three-dimensional structure from motion. PhD dissertation, New York University.
48. Rubin E (1921) Visuell wahrgenommene Figuren. Copenhagen: Glydenalske Boghandel.
49. Saxena A, Chung SH, Ng A (2005) Learning depth from single monocular images. Neural information processing systems. In: Proceedings of Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), pp 1161-1168. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
50. Simoncelli EP, Olshausen BA (2001) Natural image statistics and neural representation. Annu Rev Neurosci 24:1193-1216.
51. Stocker AA, Simoncelli EP (2006) Noise characteristics and prior expectations in human visual speed perception. Nat Neurosci 9:578-585.
52. Sugita Y (1999) Grouping of image fragments in primary visual cortex. Nature 401:269-272. (Pubitemid 29444278)
53. Troscianko T, Montagnon R, Le Clerc J, Malbert E, Chanteau PL (1991) The role of color as a monocular depth cue. Vision Res 31:1923-1929.
54. Vecera SP, Vogel EK, Woodman GF (2002) Lower region: a new cue for figure-ground assignment. J Exp Psychol 131:194-205.
55. Vinje WE, Gallant JL (2000) Sparse coding and decorrelation in primary visual cortex during natural vision. Science 287:1273-1276.
56. von Helmholtz H (1867) Handbuch der physiologischen Optik. Leipzig: Leopold Voss.
57. Watt SJ, Akeley K, Ernst MO, Banks MS (2005) Focus cues affect perceived depth. J Vis 5:834-862. (Pubitemid 43013353)
58. Weiss Y, Simoncelli EP, Adelson EH (2002) Motion illusions as optimal percepts. Nat Neurosci 5:598-604.
59. Wichmann FA, Hill NJ (2001) The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling and goodness-of-fit. Percept Psychophys 63:1293-1313.
60. Yang Z, Purves D (2003a) Image/source statistics in natural scenes. Network: Computation in Neural Systems 14:371-390.
61. Yang Z, Purves D (2003b) A statistical explanation of visual space. Nat Neurosci 6:632-640.
62. Zhou H, Friedman HS, von der Heydt R (2000) Coding of border ownership in monkey visual cortex. J Neurosci 20:6594-6611.