Computational Modeling of Face Recognition Based on Psychophysical Experiments

Recent results from psychophysical studies are discussed which clearly show that face processing is not only holistic. Humans do encode face parts (component information) in addition to information about the spatial interrelationship of facial features (global configural information). Based on these findings we propose a computational architecture of face recognition, which implements a component and configural route for encoding and recognizing faces. Modeling results showed a striking similarity between human psychophysical data and the computational model. In addition, we could show that our framework is able to achieve good recognition performance even under large view rotations. Thus, our study is an example of how an interdisciplinary approach can provide a deeper understanding of cognitive processes and lead to further insights in human psychophysics as well as computer vision.

[1]  M. Farah,et al.  Parts and Wholes in Face Recognition , 1993, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[2]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  View-Based Recognition of Faces in Man and Machine: Re-Visiting Inter-Extra-Ortho , 2002, Biologically Motivated Computer Vision.

[3]  T. Valentine.  Upside-down faces: a review of the effect of inversion upon face recognition. , 1988, British journal of psychology.

[4]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Revisiting the Perception of Upside-Down Faces , 2000, Psychological science.

[5]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Expert face processing: specialisation and constraints , 2003 .

[6]  Irvin Rock,et al.  Orientation and form , 1974 .

[7]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Stimulus-specific effects in face recognition over changes in viewpoint , 1998, Vision Research.

[8]  I Rock,et al.  On Thompson's Inverted-Face Phenomenon (Research Note) , 1988, Perception.

[9]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Acquiring Robust Representations for Recognition from Image Sequences , 2001, DAGM-Symposium.

[10]  V. Bruce,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology When Inverted Faces Are Recognized: the Role of Configural Information in Face Recognition , 2022 .

[11]  J. Bartlett,et al.  Inversion and processing of component and spatial–relational information in faces. , 1996 .

[12]  V. Bruce.  Changing faces: visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition. , 1982, British journal of psychology.

[13]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Memory and cognition , 1977 .

[14]  Erik Hjelmås,et al.  Face Detection: A Survey , 2001, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[15]  G. Hole,et al.  Featural and Configurational Processes in the Recognition of Faces of Different Familiarity , 2000, Perception.

[16]  F. Mast,et al.  The face‐inversion effect can be explained by the capacity limitations of an orientation normalization mechanism , 2005 .

[17]  Michel Vidal-Naquet,et al.  Visual features of intermediate complexity and their use in classification , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[18]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[19]  Maurizio Pilu,et al.  A direct method for stereo correspondence based on singular value decomposition , 1997, Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[20]  H. P. Bahrick,et al.  Fifty years of memory for names and faces: A cross-sectional approach. , 1975 .

[21]  H. Abdi,et al.  What Represents a Face? A Computational Approach for the Integration of Physiological and Psychological Data , 1997, Perception.

[22]  P. Schyns,et al.  Information and viewpoint dependence in face recognition , 1997, Cognition.

[23]  J Sergent.  Influence of task and input factors on hemispheric involvement in face processing. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[24]  V. Bruce,et al.  Mental rotation of faces , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[25]  J. Sergent.  An investigation into component and configural processes underlying face perception. , 1984, British journal of psychology.

[26]  I. Rock.  The perception of disoriented figures. , 1974, Scientific American.

[27]  J. Davidoff,et al.  Object superiority: a comparison of complete and part probes. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[28]  R. Yin.  Looking at Upside-down Faces , 1969 .

[29]  H. Bülthoff,et al.  Face recognition under varying poses: The role of texture and shape , 1996, Vision Research.

[30]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Role of Featural and Configural Information in Familiar and Unfamiliar Face Recognition , 2002, Biologically Motivated Computer Vision.

[31]  Thomas Vetter,et al.  A morphable model for the synthesis of 3D faces , 1999, SIGGRAPH.

[32]  M J Farah,et al.  Second-order relational properties and the inversion effect: Testing a theory of face perception , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  James W. Tanaka,et al.  What causes the face inversion effect , 1995 .

[34]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[35]  Sami Romdhani,et al.  Face identification across different poses and illuminations with a 3D morphable model , 2002, Proceedings of Fifth IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face Gesture Recognition.