The Texture Lexicon: Understanding the Categorization of Visual Texture Terms and Their Relationship to Texture Images

Abstract In this paper we present the results of two experiments. The first is on the categorization of texture words in the English language. The goal was to determine whether there is a common basis for subjects' groupings of words related to visual texture, and if so, to identify the underlying dimensions used to categorize those words. Eleven major clusters were identified through hierarchical cluster analysis, ranging from ‘random’ to ‘repetitive’. These clusters remained intact in a multidimensional scaling solution. The stress for a three-dimensional solution obtained through multidimensional scaling was 0.18, meaning that 82% of the variance in the data is explained through the use of three dimensions. It appears that the major dimensions of texture descriptors are repetitive versus nonrepetitive; linearly oriented versus circularly oriented; and simple versus complex. In the second experiment we measured the strength of association between texture words and texture images. The goal was to determine whether there is any systematic correspondence between the domains of texture words and texture images. Pearson's coefficient of contingency, a measure of the strength of association, was found to be 0.63 for words corresponding to given images and 0.56 for images corresponding to given words. Thus the texture categories in the verbal space and those in the visual space are strongly tied. In sum, our two experiments show (a) that despite the tremendous variety in the words we have to describe textures, there is an underlying structure to the lexical space which can be derived from the experimental data; and (b) that the association between a category of words and a category of images was strongest when both categories represent the same underlying property. This suggests that subjects' organizations of texture terms are systematically tied to their organization of texture images.

[1]  J. Locke An Essay concerning Human Understanding , 1924, Nature.

[2]  M. Paul A dictionary of color , 1930 .

[3]  S. C. Johnson Hierarchical clustering schemes , 1967, Psychometrika.

[4]  Masaaki Yoshida,et al.  DIMENSIONS OF TACTUAL IMPRESSIONS (1) , 1968 .

[5]  Jonathan Barnes,et al.  Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central Themes. , 1971 .

[6]  P. Newcomer,et al.  Basic Color Terms , 1971, International Journal of American Linguistics.

[7]  A. Tversky Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[8]  A. Ortony Beyond Literal Similarity , 1979 .

[9]  B. Julesz Textons, the elements of texture perception, and their interactions , 1981, Nature.

[10]  Kaufman,et al.  A New Color-Namiing System for Graphics Languages , 1982, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[11]  W. Nelson Francis,et al.  FREQUENCY ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH USAGE: LEXICON AND GRAMMAR , 1983 .

[12]  Bernard J. Wood,et al.  Atlas of Igneous Rocks and Their Textures , 1983 .

[13]  W. S. MacKenzie,et al.  Atlas of igneous rocks and their textures , 1983 .

[14]  R. Burchfield Frequency Analysis of English Usage: Lexicon and Grammar. By W. Nelson Francis and Henry Kučera with the assistance of Andrew W. Mackie. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 1982. x + 561 , 1985 .

[15]  Günther F. Schrack,et al.  CNS-HLS Mapping Using Fuzzy Sets , 1986, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[16]  Lawrence W. Barsalou,et al.  The instability of graded structure: implications for the nature of concepts , 1987 .

[17]  S. T. Dumais,et al.  Using latent semantic analysis to improve access to textual information , 1988, CHI '88.

[18]  Mark Green,et al.  Interactive animation: a language and system for procedural modeling and motion , 1988, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[19]  Crispin Wright,et al.  Moral Values, Projection and Secondary Qualities , 1988 .

[20]  Ken Perlin,et al.  An image synthesizer , 1988 .

[21]  J. Theios,et al.  Theoretical analysis of the cognitive processing of lexical and pictorial stimuli: reading, naming, and visual and conceptual comparisons. , 1989, Psychological review.

[22]  D L Medin,et al.  Concepts and conceptual structure. , 1989, The American psychologist.

[23]  R. Giora Concepts and conceptual development: Ulric Neisser, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. 317 pp , 1990 .

[24]  Norman I. Badler,et al.  Imperfection for realistic image synthesis , 1990, Comput. Animat. Virtual Worlds.

[25]  Frederick P. Brooks,et al.  Feeling and seeing: issues in force display , 1990, I3D '90.

[26]  S. Harnad Categorical Perception: The Groundwork of Cognition , 1990 .

[27]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Similarity Involving Attributes and Relations: Judgments of Similarity and Difference Are Not Inverses , 1990 .

[28]  A. R. Rao,et al.  A Taxonomy for Texture Description and Identification , 1990, Springer Series in Perception Engineering.

[29]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Relational similarity and the nonindependence of features in similarity judgments , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[30]  A. Agresti,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis , 1991, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[31]  Andrew Witkin,et al.  Reaction-diffusion textures , 1991, SIGGRAPH.

[32]  W. Glaser Picture naming , 1992, Cognition.

[33]  Gabriele Englert,et al.  Fractals and Formal Texture Specification , 1992 .

[34]  S. Harnad Connecting Object to Symbol in Modeling Cognition , 1992 .

[35]  Haim Levkowitz,et al.  GLHS: A Generalized Lightness, Hue, and Saturation Color Model , 1993, CVGIP Graph. Model. Image Process..

[36]  D. Gentner,et al.  Respects for similarity , 1993 .

[37]  A. Ravishankar Rao,et al.  Identifying High Level Features of Texture Perception , 1993, CVGIP Graph. Model. Image Process..

[38]  J. van Brakel,et al.  The Plasticity of Categories: The Case of Colour , 1993 .

[39]  A. R. Rao,et al.  Is alligator skin more wrinkled than tree bark?: the role of texture in object description , 1995 .

[40]  A. Ravishankar Rao,et al.  Towards a texture naming system: Identifying relevant dimensions of texture , 1993, Vision Research.