Preattentive texture segmentation: The role of line terminations, size, and filter wavelength

AbstractThe texel pair represents a dilemma in texture discrimination because, despite having the same component orientations, discrimination is still possible (Julesz, 1981), showing a performance asymmetry. Other possible element properties that could influence this task are line terminations, closure, and the size of these elements. We found that line terminators are critical for the task; however, results from double-task experiments indicated that terminator-based discrimination requires the use of attention. When attention is not available for the task, “size” of the elements (with the considered slightly larger) seems to be critical for this discrimination and for the asymmetric performance. To generalize the concept of “size” to textures in general, further experiments were performed with textures of different-sized elements. Results showed, as past literature has indicated, that there is a performance asymmetry, with the larger of the elements being more visible when in the foreground. This asymmetry was additionally shown to reverse itself (i.e., the smaller element became the more visible) as the scale of the elements increased (while interelement distance remained fixed). A filter analysis was developed in order to measure the apparent size of these elements within textures (texsize), defined as the response weighted average of the filter wavelength, $$\bar \lambda $$ , for a group of elements. The calculation of $$\bar \lambda $$ was attained by introducing a nonlinearity after the second stage of filtering (or spatial averaging of filter responses). This analysis showed high correlation between the texture with the larger $$\bar \lambda $$ and the more visible texture. On the basis of this correlation, a wavelength-dependent noise is proposed, having more internal noise for low-spatial-frequency filters and less for high-spatial-frequency filters.

[1]  R. Browse,et al.  Micropattern properties and presentation conditions influencing visual texture discrimination , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  I Kovács,et al.  A closed curve is much more than an incomplete one: effect of closure in figure-ground segmentation. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  U. Neisser Cognitive Psychology: Classic Edition , 1967 .

[4]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  J. Daugman Uncertainty relation for resolution in space, spatial frequency, and orientation optimized by two-dimensional visual cortical filters. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[6]  J A Solomon,et al.  Texture interactions determine perceived contrast , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  P. E. Hallett,et al.  Texture segregation based on two-dimensional relative phase differences in composite sine-wave grating patterns , 1993, Vision Research.

[8]  Jacob Beck,et al.  Spatial frequency channels and perceptual grouping in texture segregation , 1987, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[9]  A. Treisman Preattentive processing in vision , 1985, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[10]  Mark W. Cannon,et al.  Spatial interactions in apparent contrast: Inhibitory effects among grating patterns of different spatial frequencies, spatial positions and orientations , 1991, Vision Research.

[11]  B. S. Rubenstein,et al.  Effects of foreground scale in texture discrimination tasks: performance is size, shape, and content specific. , 1993, Spatial vision.

[12]  B. Julesz A brief outline of the texton theory of human vision , 1984, Trends in Neurosciences.

[13]  B. Julesz,et al.  Short-range limitation on detection of feature differences. , 1987, Spatial vision.

[14]  S. Hochstein,et al.  Lateral inhibition between spatially adjacent spatial-frequency channels? , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  E. Adelson,et al.  Early vision and texture perception , 1988, Nature.

[16]  H. Nothdurft Sensitivity for structure gradient in texture discrimination tasks , 1985, Vision Research.

[17]  D. Sagi,et al.  Parallel processes within the 'spot-light' of attention. , 1992, Spatial vision.

[18]  D. Sagi,et al.  Vision outside the focus of attention , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  B Julesz,et al.  Inability of Humans to Discriminate between Visual Textures That Agree in Second-Order Statistics—Revisited , 1973, Perception.

[20]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  Computational processes in human vision : an interdisciplinary perspective , 1988 .

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

[22]  J. Bergen,et al.  Texture segregation and orientation gradient , 1991, Vision Research.

[23]  B. S. Rubenstein,et al.  Spatial variability as a limiting factor in texture-discrimination tasks: implications for performance asymmetries. , 1990, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[24]  J. Beck Similarity Grouping of Curves , 1973, Perceptual and motor skills.

[25]  T. Caelli Three processing characteristics of visual texture segmentation. , 1985, Spatial vision.

[26]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries. , 1988, Psychological review.

[27]  Bela Julesz,et al.  Filters Versus Textons in Human and Machine Texture Discrimination , 1992 .

[28]  R. Browse,et al.  Asymmetries in visual texture discrimination. , 1989, Spatial vision.

[29]  D. Sagi,et al.  Perceptual grouping by similarity and proximity: Experimental results can be predicted by intensity autocorrelations , 1995, Vision Research.

[30]  Mercedes Barchilon Ben-Av,et al.  Disambiguating velocity estimates across image space , 1995, Vision Research.

[31]  J. Beck Organization and representation in perception , 1982 .

[32]  P Perona,et al.  Preattentive texture discrimination with early vision mechanisms. , 1990, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.