A Saidpour | PubMed Health

PubMed1992

Interpolation in structure from motion.

We investigated surface interpolation in displays of structure from motion (SFM). To do so, we introduced a new method for measuring surface perception in dynamic displays--the SFM probe. An SFM probe is a dot that moves rigidly with the dots on a simulated surface, and whose distance from that surface can be adjusted with a joystick or similar control. The displays we studied were random-dot cylinders containing a vertical strip devoid of feature points (the gap). Subjects adjusted an SFM probe, presented in the gap, until the probe dot appeared to be on the surface. Variability in probe-dot placement decreased with increasing texture density on the cylinder and increased with increasing gap width. Subjects showed a consistent bias to place the probe dot outside the cylinder. This bias increased with increasing texture density for the SFM displays. (The opposite bias was found in a static two-dimensional interpolation task with an arc whose curvature matched that of the cylinder: Subjects placed the probe dot inside the arc.) This outside bias is inconsistent with several theoretical approaches to surface interpolation.

Adult↗

PubMed1989

Parts of visual objects: an experimental test of the minima rule.

Three experiments were conducted to test Hoffman and Richards's (1984) hypothesis that, for purposes of visual recognition, the human visual system divides three-dimensional shapes into parts at negative minima of curvature. In the first two experiments, subjects observed a simulated object (surface of revolution) rotating about a vertical axis, followed by a display of four alternative parts. They were asked to select a part that was from the object. Two of the four parts were divided at negative minima of curvature and two at positive maxima. When both a minima part and a maxima part from the object were presented on each trial (experiment 1), most of the correct responses were minima parts (101 versus 55). When only one part from the object--either a minima part or a maxima part--was shown on each trial (experiment 2), accuracy on trials with correct minima parts and correct maxima parts did not differ significantly. However, some subjects indicated that they reversed figure and ground, thereby changing maxima parts into minima parts. In experiment 3, subjects marked apparent part boundaries. 81% of these marks indicated minima parts, 10% of the marks indicated maxima parts, and 9% of the marks were at other positions. These results provide converging evidence, from two different methods, which supports Hoffman and Richard's minima rule.

Attention↗