Cogprints
Login | Create Account

Self-motion and the perception of stationary objects

Wexler, Mark and Panerai, Francesco and Lamouret, Ivan and Droulez, Jacques (2000) Self-motion and the perception of stationary objects. [Preprint]

Warning

There is a more recent version of this eprint available. Click here to view it.

Full text available as:

[img]
Preview
PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
237Kb

Abstract

One of the ways we perceive shape is through seeing motion. Visual motion may be actively generated (for example, in locomotion), or passively observed. In the study of how we perceive 3D structure from motion (SfM), the non-moving, passive observer in an environment of moving rigid objects has been used as a substitute for an active observer moving in an environment of stationary objects; the 'rigidity hypothesis' has played a central role in computational and experimental studies of SfM. Here we demonstrate that this substitution is not fully adequate, because active observers perceive 3D structure differently from passive observers, despite experiencing the same visual stimulus: active observers' perception of 3D structure depends on extra-visual self-motion information. Moreover, the visual system, making use of the self-motion information treats objects that are stationary (in an allocentric, earth-fixed reference frame) differently from objects that are merely rigid. These results show that action plays a central role in depth perception, and argue for a revision of the rigidity hypothesis to incorporate the special case of stationary objects.

Item Type:Preprint
Keywords:3D vision spatial vision depth perception action self-motion rigidity hypothesis active vision
Subjects:Neuroscience > Behavioral Neuroscience
Psychology > Perceptual Cognitive Psychology
Psychology > Psychophysics
ID Code:950
Deposited By:Wexler, Mark
Deposited On:02 Sep 2000
Last Modified:12 Sep 2007 17:35

Available Versions of this Item

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

[1] H. Wallach and D.N. O'Connell. The kinetic depth effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45:205-217, 1953.

[2] M.L. Braunstein. Depth perception in rotating dot patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 72:415-420, 1962.

[3] G. Johansson. Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception and Psychophysics, 14:210-211, 1973.

[4] S. Ullman. The interpretation of visual motion. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1979.

[5] J.J. Koenderink. Optic flow. Vision Research, 26(1):161-179, 1986.

[6] B. Rogers and M. Graham. Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception. Perception, 8(2):125-134, 1979.

[7] B. Rogers and M. Graham. Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception. Vision Research, 22(2):261-270, 1982.

[8] S. Rogers and B.J. Rogers. Visual and nonvisual information disambiguate surfaces specified by motion parallax. Perception and Psychophysics, 52(4):446-452, 1992.

[9] T.M. Dijkstra, V. Cornilleau-Pérès, C.C. Gielen, and J. Droulez. Perception of three-dimensional shape from ego- and object-motion: comparison between small- and large-field stimuli. Vision Research, 35(4):453-462, 1995.

[10] W.J. van Damme and W.A. van de Grind. Non-visual information in structure-from-motion. Vision Research, 36(19):3119-3127, 1996.

[11] K.A. Stevens. Surface tilt (the direction of slant): a neglected psychophysical variable. Perception and Psychophysics, 33(3):241-250, 1983.

[12] M.S. Landy, L.T. Maloney, E.B. Johnston, and M. Young. Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: in defense of weak fusion. Vision Research, 35(3):389-412, 1995.

[13] F. Attneave and R. Frost. The determination of perceived tridimensional orientation by minimum criteria. Perception and Psychophysics, 6:391-396, 1969.

[14] H.C. Longuet-Higgins and K. Prazdny. The interpretation of a moving retinal image. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B, Biological Sciences), 208(1173):385-397, 1980.

[15] J.T. Todd. Visual information about rigid and non-rigid motion: a geometric analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8(2):238-252, 1982.

[16] H. Wallach, A. Weisz, and P.A. Adams. Circles and derived figures in rotation. American Journal of Psychology, 69:48-59, 1956.

[17] E.H. Adelson. Rigid objects that appear highly non-rigid. Invest. Ophthal. Visual Sci., 26 (Suppl.), 1985.

[18] P. Sinha and T. Poggio. Role of learning in three-dimensional form perception. Nature, 384(6608):460-463, 1996.

[19] J.E. Sparrow and W.W. Stine. The perceived rigidity of rotating eight-vertex geometric forms: extracting nonrigid structure from rigid motion. Vision Research, 38(4):541-556, 1998.

[20] A. Ames. Visual perception and the rotating trapezoidal window. Psychological Monographs, 65(7), 1951.

[21] W.H. Ittelson. The Ames demonstrations in perception. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1952.

[22] V. Cornilleau-Pérès, M. Wexler, E. Marin, and J. Droulez. The perception of surface orientation in small and wide-field. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (Supplement), 40, 1999.

[23] J.J. Gibson. The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, 1979.

[24] A.H. Reinhardt-Rutland. Perceiving surface orientation: Pictorial information based on rectangularity can be overridden during observer motion. Perception, 22:335-341, 1993.

[25] J. Aloimonos, I. Weiss, and A. Bandyopadhyay. Active vision. International Journal of Computer Vision, 1(333-356), 1988.

[26] H. Ono and M.J. Steinbach. Monocular stereopsis with and without head movement. Perception and Psychophysics, 48(2):179-187, 1990.

[27] J.A. Crowell, M.S. Banks, K.V. Shenoy, and R.A. Andersen. Visual self-motion perception during head turns. Nature Neuroscience, 1:732-737, 1998.

[28] J. O'Keefe and L. Nadel. The hippocampus as a cognitive map. Oxford, 1978.

[29] L.H. Snyder, K.L. Grieve, P. Brotchie, and R.A. Andersen. Separate body- and world-referenced representations of visual space in parietal cortex. Nature, 394:887-891, 1998.

[30] F. Panerai, S. Hanneton, J. Droulez, and V. Cornilleau-Pérès. A 6-dof device to measure head movements in active vision experiments: Geometric modeling and metric accuracy. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 90(2):97-106, 1999.

Metadata

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Cogprints is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.