TY - JOUR
T1 - How are three-dimensional objects represented in the brain?
AU - Bülthoff, Heinrich H.
AU - Edelman, Shimon Y.
AU - Tarr, Michael J.
N1 - Funding Information:
2. To ensure that subjects did not rely on unique features, several "distractor" objects were also included. Rather than naming such objects, subjects simply made a "none-of-the-above" response. 3. Recent psychophysical and computational studies indicate that viewpoint dependence may be to a large extent an intrinsic characteristic of 3D shapes (Cutzu and Edelman, 1992; Weinshall et al., 1993). 4. Such a judgment is commonly referred to as an "explicit" memory task. While some dissociations in performance have been found between similar explicit tasks and so-called "implicit* tasks such as priming or naming (Schachter, 1987), there is little evidence to indicate that this dissociation holds for changes across viewpoint (Cooper and Schacter, 1992). Moreover, Palmer et al.'s (1981) and Tarr's (1989; Tarr and Pinker, 1989) studies employed implicit tasks, yet still revealed robust effects of viewpoint. 5 These findings also rule out the possibility that the increase in the uniformity of response time over different views, caused by practice, is due to the formation of a viewpoint-invariant representation of the target object. 6. The basic limitation on the use of depth in recognition stems from its representation in a viewpoint-dependent coordinate frame [in Marr's terminology (Marr, 1982), such representation would be called a 2&D-sketch]. Another possible limitation is expected in view of the recent findings regarding the imperfections of the perception of 3D shape, as mediated by different depth cues (Biilthoff and Mal-lot, 1988) We thank Emanuela Bricolo.Dan Kersten, Tommy Poggio.and Erik Sklar for their insightful comments and thoughtful advice. H.H.B was supported by the Office of Naval Research (ONR), Cognitive and Neural Sciences Division, Contracts N00014-92-J-1879 and N00014-93-1-0385. S Y.E was supported by the Basic Research Foundation, administered by the Israel Academy of Arts and Sciences. M J.T. was supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Contract F49620-91-J-0169, and the Office of Naval Research, Contract NOOO14-93-1-O3O5. Correspondence should be addressed to Heinrich Bulthoff, Max-Planck-Institut fur biologische Kybernetik, Spemannstrasse 38, D-72076 Tubingen, Germany.
PY - 1995/5
Y1 - 1995/5
N2 - In this report we discuss a variety of psychophysical experiments that explore different aspects of the problem of object recognition and representation in human vision. In all experiments, subjects were presented with realistically rendered images of computer-generated 3D objects, with tight control over stimulus shape, surface properties, illumination, and viewpoint, as well as subjects' prior exposure to the stimulus objects. Contrary to the predictions of the paradigmatic theory of recognition, which holds that object representations are viewpoint invariant performance in all experiments was consistently viewpoint dependent, was only partially aided by binocular stereo and other depth information, was specific to viewpoints that were familiar, and was systematically disrupted by rotation in depth more than by deforming the 2D images of the stimuli. The emerging concept of multiple-views representation supported by these results is consistent with recently advanced computational theories of recognition based on view interpolation. Moreover, in several simulated experiments employing the same stimuli used in experiments with human subjects, models based on multiple-views representations replicated many of the psychophysical results concerning the observed pattern of human performance.
AB - In this report we discuss a variety of psychophysical experiments that explore different aspects of the problem of object recognition and representation in human vision. In all experiments, subjects were presented with realistically rendered images of computer-generated 3D objects, with tight control over stimulus shape, surface properties, illumination, and viewpoint, as well as subjects' prior exposure to the stimulus objects. Contrary to the predictions of the paradigmatic theory of recognition, which holds that object representations are viewpoint invariant performance in all experiments was consistently viewpoint dependent, was only partially aided by binocular stereo and other depth information, was specific to viewpoints that were familiar, and was systematically disrupted by rotation in depth more than by deforming the 2D images of the stimuli. The emerging concept of multiple-views representation supported by these results is consistent with recently advanced computational theories of recognition based on view interpolation. Moreover, in several simulated experiments employing the same stimuli used in experiments with human subjects, models based on multiple-views representations replicated many of the psychophysical results concerning the observed pattern of human performance.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029063252&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/cercor/5.3.247
DO - 10.1093/cercor/5.3.247
M3 - Article
C2 - 7613080
AN - SCOPUS:0029063252
SN - 1047-3211
VL - 5
SP - 247
EP - 260
JO - Cerebral Cortex
JF - Cerebral Cortex
IS - 3
ER -