Attentive and Pre-Attentive Processes in Multiple Object Tracking: A Computational Investigation

The rich literature on multiple object tracking (MOT) conclusively demonstrates that humans are able to visually track a small number of objects. There is considerably less agreement on what perceptual and cognitive processes are involved. While it is clear that MOT is attentionally demanding, various accounts of MOT performance centrally involve pre-attentional mechanisms as well. In this paper we present an account of object tracking in the ARCADIA cognitive system that treats MOT as dependent upon both preattentive and attention-bound processes. We show that with minimal addition this model replicates a variety of core phenomena in the MOT literature and provides an algorithmic explanation of human performance limitations.

[1]  George A. Alvarez,et al.  Explaining human multiple object tracking as resource-constrained approximate inference in a dynamic probabilistic model , 2009, NIPS.

[2]  Ed Vul,et al.  Attention dynamics in multiple object tracking , 2015, CogSci.

[3]  Paul Bello,et al.  Incremental Object Perception in an Attention-Driven Cognitive Architecture , 2015, CogSci.

[4]  M. Chun,et al.  Selecting and perceiving multiple visual objects , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[5]  Alex O. Holcombe,et al.  Position representations lag behind targets in multiple object tracking , 2011, Vision Research.

[6]  Daniel R. Little,et al.  Hemifield Effects in Multiple Identity Tracking , 2012, PloS one.

[7]  Jason M. Scimeca,et al.  Tracking Multiple Objects Is Limited Only by Object Spacing, Not by Speed, Time, or Capacity , 2010, Psychological science.

[8]  Helga C. Arsenio,et al.  Do multielement visual tracking and visual search draw continuously on the same visual attention resources? , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  Z. Pylyshyn.  Some puzzling findings in multiple object tracking (MOT): II. Inhibition of moving nontargets , 2006 .

[10]  Z. Pylyshyn.  The role of location indexes in spatial perception: A sketch of the FINST spatial-index model , 1989, Cognition.

[11]  Christof Koch,et al.  A Model of Saliency-Based Visual Attention for Rapid Scene Analysis , 2009 .

[12]  Paul Bello,et al.  Inattentional Blindness in a Coupled Perceptual-Cognitive System , 2016, CogSci.

[13]  Steven L Franconeri,et al.  Selecting and tracking multiple objects. , 2015, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[14]  T. Horowitz,et al.  The role of location and motion information in the tracking and recovery of moving objects , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  Z W Pylyshyn,et al.  Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. , 1988, Spatial vision.

[16]  Steven L Franconeri,et al.  A simple proximity heuristic allows tracking of multiple objects through occlusion , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[17]  S. Yantis.  Multielement visual tracking: Attention and perceptual organization , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  George A Alvarez,et al.  How many objects can you track? Evidence for a resource-limited attentive tracking mechanism. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[19]  Alex O Holcombe,et al.  Motion information is sometimes used as an aid to the visual tracking of objects. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[20]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Is motion extrapolation employed in multiple object tracking? Tracking as a low-level, non-predictive function , 2006, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  Z. Pylyshyn.  Some puzzling findings in multiple object tracking: I. Tracking without keeping track of object identities , 2004 .

[22]  M. Dawson,et al.  The how and why of what went where in apparent motion: modeling solutions to the motion correspondence problem. , 1991, Psychological review.

[23]  Y. Liu,et al.  Why do people appear not to extrapolate trajectories during multiple object tracking? A computational investigation. , 2014, Journal of vision.