Symmetry mediates the bootstrapping of 3-D relief slant to metric slant

Empirical studies have always shown 3-D slant and shape perception to be inaccurate as a result of relief scaling (an unknown scaling along the depth direction). Wang, Lind, and Bingham ( Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44 (10), 1508–1522, 2018 ) discovered that sufficient relative motion between the observer and 3-D objects in the form of continuous perspective change (≥45°) could enable accurate 3-D slant perception. They attributed this to a bootstrap process (Lind, Lee, Mazanowski, Kountouriotis, & Bingham in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 40 (1), 83, 2014 ) where the perceiver identifies right angles formed by texture elements and tracks them in the 3-D relief structure through rotation to extrapolate the unknown scaling factor, then used to convert 3-D relief structure to 3-D Euclidean structure. This study examined the nature of the bootstrap process in slant perception. In a series of four experiments, we demonstrated that (1) features of 3-D relief structure, instead of 2-D texture elements, were tracked (Experiment 1 ); (2) identifying right angles was not necessary, and a different implementation of the bootstrap process is more suitable for 3-D slant perception (Experiment 2 ); and (3) mirror symmetry is necessary to produce accurate slant estimation using the bootstrapped scaling factor (Experiments 3 and 4 ). Together, the results support the hypothesis that a symmetry axis is used to determine the direction of slant and that 3-D relief structure is tracked over sufficiently large perspective change to produce metric depth. Altogether, the results supported the bootstrap process.

[1]  J S Tittle,et al.  The visual perception of three-dimensional length. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  James T Todd,et al.  Are discrimination thresholds a valid measure of variance for judgments of slant from texture? , 2010, Journal of vision.

[3]  Hal A. Sedgwick,et al.  Environment-centered and viewer-centered perception of surface orientation , 1985, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[4]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[5]  Andrea J. van Doorn,et al.  Relief: pictorial and otherwise , 1995, Image Vis. Comput..

[6]  Yury Petrov,et al.  Locus of spatial attention determines inward-outward anisotropy in crowding. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[7]  S Hochstein,et al.  Visual orientation estimation , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  J. Saunders,et al.  Perception of 3D surface orientation from skew symmetry , 2001, Vision Research.

[9]  J. Todd,et al.  Effects of changing viewing conditions on the perceived structure of smoothly curved surfaces. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  J J Koenderink,et al.  On So-Called Paradoxical Monocular Stereoscopy , 1994, Perception.

[11]  Zygmunt Pizlo,et al.  3D Shape - Its Unique Place in Visual Perception , 2008 .

[12]  B. Julesz Foundations of Cyclopean Perception , 1971 .

[13]  Fulvio Domini,et al.  Perception and Action Without Veridical Metric Reconstruction: An Affine Approach , 2013, Shape Perception in Human and Computer Vision.

[14]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[15]  J. Gibson The perception of visual surfaces. , 1950, The American journal of psychology.

[16]  J. Gibson,et al.  The perceived slant of visual surfaces-optical and geographical. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  M. Wagner,et al.  The metric of visual space , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  Mats Lind,et al.  Large Continuous Perspective Change With Noncoplanar Points Enables Accurate Slant Perception , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  3D Motion recovery via affine Epipolar geometry , 1995, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[20]  B. G. Cumming,et al.  Binocular mechanisms for detecting motion-in-depth , 1994, Vision Research.

[21]  K. A. Stevens Surface tilt (the direction of slant): A neglected psychophysical variable , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  Jan J. Koenderink,et al.  On the Affine Structure of Perceptual Space , 2001, Psychological science.

[23]  Mats Lind,et al.  Object recognition using metric shape , 2012, Vision Research.

[24]  D. W. Thompson,et al.  Three-dimensional model matching from an unconstrained viewpoint , 1987, Proceedings. 1987 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[25]  Kent A. Stevens,et al.  Slant-tilt: The visual encoding of surface orientation , 1983, Biological Cybernetics.

[26]  Mats Lind,et al.  Affine operations plus symmetry yield perception of metric shape with large perspective changes (≥45°): data and model. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  Hideko F. Norman,et al.  Visual discrimination of local surface structure: Slant, tilt, and curvedness , 2006, Vision Research.

[28]  Zygmunt Pizlo,et al.  A Bayesian model of binocular perception of 3D mirror symmetrical polyhedra. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[29]  Mats Lind,et al.  Large continuous perspective transformations are necessary and sufficient for accurate perception of metric shape , 2008, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  J. Koenderink,et al.  Depth Relief , 1995, Perception.

[31]  Denis G. Pelli,et al.  ECVP '07 Abstracts , 2007, Perception.

[32]  Julie M. Harris,et al.  Two Independent Mechanisms for Motion-In-Depth Perception: Evidence from Individual Differences , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[33]  C Shawn Green,et al.  Optimal Combination of the Binocular Cues to 3D Motion. , 2015, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[34]  Richard D. Morey,et al.  Confidence Intervals from Normalized Data: A correction to Cousineau (2005) , 2008 .

[35]  Viola S. Störmer,et al.  Feature-based interference from unattended visual field during attentional tracking in younger and older adults. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[36]  J. T. Todd Corrections to: Are discrimination thresholds a valid measure of variance for judgments of slant from texture? , 2010 .

[37]  Mats Lind,et al.  Perceived 3D metric (or Euclidean) shape is merely ambiguous, not systematically distorted , 2012, Experimental Brain Research.

[38]  J. Koenderink,et al.  Surface perception in pictures , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[39]  Hirohisa Yaguchi,et al.  Motion in depth based on inter-ocular velocity differences , 2000, Vision Research.

[40]  M Lind Perceiving motion and rigid structure from optic flow: A combined weak-perspective and polar-perspective approach , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  James T Todd,et al.  The visual perception of 3-D shape from multiple cues: Are observers capable of perceiving metric structure? , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[42]  Geoffrey P. Bingham,et al.  Center of mass perception: Perturbation of symmetry , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[43]  J T Todd,et al.  The perception of 3-dimensional affine structure from minimal apparent motion sequences , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[44]  J T Todd,et al.  The visual perception of smoothly curved surfaces from minimal apparent motion sequences , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[45]  Zygmunt Pizlo,et al.  New approach to the perception of 3D shape based on veridicality, complexity, symmetry and volume , 2010, Vision Research.

[46]  Geoffrey P. Bingham,et al.  Large perspective changes yield perception of metric shape that allows accurate feedforward reaches-to-grasp and it persists after the optic flow has stopped! , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[47]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method , 2005 .

[48]  G. Bingham,et al.  Center of mass perception and inertial frames of reference , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[49]  Geoffrey P Bingham,et al.  Searching for invariance: Geographical and optical slant , 2018, Vision Research.

[50]  J J Koenderink,et al.  Affine structure from motion. , 1991, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[51]  F. Durgin,et al.  The perception of 2D orientation is categorically biased. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[52]  Mats Lind,et al.  Bootstrapping a better slant: A stratified process for recovering 3D metric slant , 2019, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[53]  Zygmunt Pizlo,et al.  Detection of skewed symmetry. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[54]  J T Todd,et al.  The visual perception of surface orientation from optical motion , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[55]  James T. Todd,et al.  The perception of surface orientation from multiple sources of optical information , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.