SEMINAR IN COGNITION Object and surface perception Fall 2001

Transcription

1 SEMINAR IN COGNITION Object and surface perception Fall 2001 Course: Psych 637 (16: 830: 637) Time : W 2:50 5:30 Code : Place : Psy-301, Busch Instructor : Manish Singh Office Hours: Office : 119 Psych Building M 2:00 4:00 Phone : or by appointment manish@ruccs.rutgers.edu Brief Course Description: How does our visual system construct percepts of objects and surfaces? The inputs to the visual system consist of two-dimensional arrays of light intensities projected on our retinas. What we perceive, however, are solid objects embedded in a three-dimensional environment. These objects are seen as having specific shapes, sizes, colors, textures, opacities, and relative spatial locations. In this seminar, we will discuss some of the basic aspects of the visual construction of objects and surfaces. Specific topics will include: segmentation of objects from the background, computation of surface structure under partial occlusion and transparency, computation and representation of 3D shape, segmentation of objects into parts, and assignment of surface attributes (such as lightness, opacity, local orientation, and curvature). The focus will be on computational theories of these visual abilities, and on psychophysical tests of the theories. We will also study the relationship between object perception and the allocation of visual attention. In particular: to what extent does the computation of object and surface structure occur pre-attentively, and how is the allocation of visual attention influenced by object and surface representations? Format: Each week, we will read and discuss 2-3 articles on a given topic. The default reading schedule is detailed in the following pages, but the specific readings are subject to change based on the interests of the participants in the seminar. If you have specific topics or readings you d like to discuss, please bring them up in the first few weeks. Grading: A paper (about 20 pages long) will be due at the end of the semester. You are free to choose any topic related to the contents of the seminar; but are encouraged to discuss topics of interest with the instructor first. You may use this assignment as a means of exploring a topic in visual cognition of interest to you, or to explore links between your main area of interest and some aspect of visual cognition.

2 SCHEDULE: Week Topic Readings 1 How to approach the study Koffka; Marr; *Adelson & Pentland of perception? 2 Perceptual Grouping Wertheimer; Witkin & Tenenbaum *Kanizsa; *Field et al. 3 Object Segmentation Rubin; Nakayama et al. *Baylis & Driver; *Peterson & Gibson 4 Object Completion Michotte et al.; Kellman & Shipley *Anderson et al.; *Takeichi et al. 5 3D shape from occluding Koenderink; Koenderink et contours and shading al.; *Todd et al. 6 3D shape representation Marr & Nishihara; Biederman; and recognition *Hayward & Tarr 7 Part-based shape Hoffman & Richards; Driver Baylis descriptions *Siddiqi et al.; *Singh & Hoffman; 8 Lightness Adelson; Anderson; *Gilchrist et al. 9 Transparency Metelli; Singh & Anderson; *Beck et al.; *Gerbino et al. (+ Anderson from previous week.) 10 Pre-attentive processing I Treisman & Gelade; Joseph et al.; *Julesz 11 Pre-attentive processing II He & Nakayama; Rauschenberger & Yantis; Davis & Driver 94 *Rensink & Enns 12 Objects and attention I Egly et al.; Moore et al.; *Duncan 13 Objects and attention II Davis & Driver 97; Vecera et al.; *Atchley & Kramer Note: * indicates relevant, but optional, reading for the week.

3 READINGS: How to approach the study of perception? *Adelson, E. H., & Pentland, A. P. (1996). The perception of shading and reflectance. In D.C. Knill and W. Richards (Eds.), Perception as Bayesian Inference (pp ), Cambridge University Press. Koffka, K. (1935) Why do things look as they do? From Principles of Gestalt Psychology. Harcourt, Brace, and World. Marr (1982). The philosophy and the approach. Chapter 1 from Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information (pp. 8 38). W. H. Freeman and Company. Perceptual grouping. *Field, D. J., Hayes, A., & Hess, R. E. (1993). Contour integration by the human visual system: evidence for a local "association field." Vision Research, 33, *Kanizsa, G. (1979). The role of regularity in perceptual organization. Chapeter 5 from Organization in Vision. Praeger Publishers. Wertheimer, M. (1923). Principles of perceptual organization. Translated from Psychologische Foschung, 4, Witkin, A., & Tenenbaum, J. M. (1983). On the role of structure in vision. (Excerpts) In J. Beck, B. Hope, and A. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Human and machine vision. Academic Press. Object segmentation and completion. *Anderson, B., Singh, M., & Fleming, R. (2001). The interpolation of object and surface structure. Cognitive Psychology, in press. *Baylis, G., & Driver, J. (1995). One-sided edge assignment in Vision: 1. Figure-ground segmentation and attention to objects. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, Kellman, P. J., & Shipley, T. F. (1991). A theory of visual interpolation in object perception. Cognitive Psychology, 23, Michotte, A., Thines, G., & Crabbe, G. (1991/1964). Amodal completion of perceptual structures. In G. Thines, A. Costall, & G. Butterworth (Eds.), Michotte s experimental phenomenology of perception (pp ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. (Original work published in 1964). Nakayama, K., He, Z., & Shimojo, S. (1995). Visual surface representation: A critical link between lower-level and higher-level vision. (Excerpts) In: S. M. Kosslyn and D. N. Osherson (Eds.), Visual Cognition: An invitation to cognitive science, Vol. 2 (2 nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. *Peterson, M., & Gibson, B. (1994). Must figure-ground organization precede object recognition? Psychological Science, 5, Rubin, E. (1921). Visuall wahrgenommene Figuren. (Figure and ground.) Copenhagen: Gylden Kalske Boghandel. *Takeichi, H., Nakazawa, H., Murakami, I., & Shimojo, S. (1995). The theory of the curvature-constraint line for amodal completion. Perception, 24,

4 Shape description. Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, Driver, J., & Baylis, G. (1995). One-sided edge assignment in Vision: 2. Part decomposition, shape description, and attention to objects. Current Directions is Psychological Science, 4, *Hayward, W., Tarr, M. (1997). Testing conditions for viewpoint invariance in object recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, Hoffman, D.D., & Richards, W.A. (1984). Parts of recognition. Cognition, 18, Koenderink, J. (1984). What does the occluding contour tell us about solid shape? Perception, 13, Koenderink, J., van Doorn, A., & Kappers, A. (1992). Surface perception in pictures. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, Marr, D. & Nishihara, H. K. (1978). Representation and recognition of three-dimensional shapes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 200, *Siddiqi, K., Tresness, K., & Kimia, B.B. (1996). Parts of visual form: psychophysical aspects. Perception, 25, *Singh, M. & Hoffman, D. D. (2001). Part-based representations of visual shape and implications for visual cognition. In: T. Shipley and P. Kellman, From fragments to objects: Segmentation and grouping in vision. Elsevier Press. In Press. *Todd, J., Koenderink, J., van Doorn, A., & Kappers, A. (1996). Effects of changing viewing conditions on the perceived structure of smoothly curved surfaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, Lightness and Transparency. Adelson, E. H. (2000). Lightness perception and lightness illusions. In M. Gazzaniga, (Ed.), The Cognitive Neurosciences, 2nd ed.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Anderson, B.L. (1997). A theory of illusory lightness and transparency in monocular and binocular images: the role of junctions. Perception, 26, *Beck, J., Prazdny, K., and Ivry, R. (1984). The perception of transparency with achromatic colors. Perception & Psychophysics, 35, *Gerbino, W., Stultiens, C., Troost, J., and de Weert, C. (1990). Transparent layer constancy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, *Gilchrist, A. et al. (1999). An anchoring theory of lightness perception. Psychological Review, 106, Metelli, F. (1974). The perception of transparency. Scientific American, 230, Singh, M. & Anderson, B. L. (2001). Toward a perceptual theory of transparency. Psychological Review, in press. "Pre-attentive" processing of objects and surfaces. Davis, G., & Driver, J. (1994). Parallel detection of Kanizsa subjective figures in the human visual system. Nature, 371, He, Z., & Nakayama, K. (1992). Surfaces versus features in visual search. Nature, 359, Joseph, J. S., Chun, M. M., & Nakayama, K. (1996). Attentional requirements in a preattentive feature search task. Nature, 379, *Julesz, B. (1981). Textons, the elements of texture perception, and their interactions. Nature,

5 290, *Rensink, R., & Enns, J. (1998). Early completion of occluded objects. Vision Research, 38, Rauschenberger, R., & Yantis, S. (2001). Masking unveils pre-amodal completion representation in visual search. Nature, 410, Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, Visual attention and perceptual organization into objects and surfaces. *Atchley, P., & Kramer, A. (2001). Object and space-based attentional selection in threedimensional space. Visual Cognition, 8, Davis, G., & Driver, J. (1997). Spreading of visual attention to modally versus amodally completed regions. Psychological Science, 8, *Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, Egly, R., Driver, J., & Rafal, R. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence for normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, Moore, C., Yantis, S., & Vaughan, B. (1998). Object-based visual selection: Evidence from perceptual completion. Psychological Science, 9, Vecera, S., Behrmann, M., & Filapek, J. (2001). Attending to the parts of a single object: Part-based selection limitations. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, Some relevant review chapters / papers *Driver, J., & Baylis, G. C. (1998). Attention and visual object segmentation. In R. Parasuraman (Ed.), The attentive brain (pp ). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. *Koenderink, J. (1998). Pictorial relief. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 356, *Nakayama, K., He, Z., & Shimojo, S. (1995). Visual surface representation: A critical link between lower-level and higher-level vision. In: S. M. Kosslyn and D. N. Osherson (Eds.), Visual Cognition: An invitation to cognitive science, Vol. 2 (2 nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. *Rafal, R. D. (1998). Neglect. In R. Parasuraman (Ed.), The attentive brain (pp ). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. *Scholl, B. J. (2001). Objects and attention: The state of the art. Cognition, 80, *Singh, M. & Hoffman, D. D. (2001). Part-based representations of visual shape and implications for visual cognition. In: T. Shipley and P. Kellman, From fragments to objects: Segmentation and grouping in vision. Elsevier Press. In Press.