Advertisement

International Journal of Computer Vision

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 237–260 | Cite as

A Bayesian approach to binocular steropsis

  • Peter N. Belhumeur
Article

Abstract

We develop a computational model for binocular stereopsis, attempting to explain the process by which the information detailing the 3-D geometry of object surfaces is encoded in a pair of stereo images. We design our model within a Bayesian framework, making explicit all of our assumptions about the nature of image coding and the structure of the world. We start by deriving our model for image formation, introducing a definition of half-occluded regions and deriving simple equations relating these regions to the disparity function. We show that the disparity function alone contains enough information to determine the half-occluded regions. We use these relations to derive a model for image formation in which the half-occluded regions are explicitly represented and computed. Next, we present our prior model in a series of three stages, or “worlds,” where each world considers an additional complication to the prior. We eventually argue that the prior model must be constructed from all of the local quantities in the scene geometry-i.e., depth, surface orientation, object boundaries, and surface creases. In addition, we present a new dynamic programming strategy for estimating these quantities. Throughout the article, we provide motivation for the development of our model by psychophysical examinations of the human visual system.

Keywords

Dynamic Programming Bayesian Approach Human Visual System Image Formation Simple Equation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, B. 1992. Personal communication. Technical Report. Harvard University.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, H. and Binford, T. 1981. Depth from edge and intensity based stereo. In IJCAI, pp. 631–636.Google Scholar
  3. Belhumeur, P. 1993. A Bayesian Approach to the Stereo Correspondence Problem. Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  4. Belhumeur, P. and Mumford, D. 1992. A Bayesian treatment of the stereo correspondence problem using half-occluded regions. In IEEE Proc. Conf. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 506–512.Google Scholar
  5. Besag, J. 1974. Spatial interaction and statistical analysis of lattice systems. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Lond. B., 36:192–225.Google Scholar
  6. Blake, A. and Zisserman, A. 1987. Visual Reconstruction. MIT Press: Cambridge, USA.Google Scholar
  7. Bulthoff, H., Fahle, M., and Wegmen, M. 1991. Disparity gradients and depth scaling. Perception 20, pp. 145–153.Google Scholar
  8. Cernuschi-Frias, B., Belhumeur, P., and Cooper, D. 1985. Estimating and recognizing parameterized 3-D objects using a moving camera. In Proc. Conf. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 167–171.Google Scholar
  9. Cernuschi-Frias, B., Cooper, D., Hung, Y., and Belhumeur, B. 1989. Toward a model-based Bayesian theory for estimating and recognizing parameterized 3-D objects using two or more images taken from different positions. IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, pp. 1028–1052.Google Scholar
  10. Clark, J. and Yuille, A. 1990. Data Fusion for Sensory Information, Kluwer Academic Press: Boston.Google Scholar
  11. Cochran, S. and Medioni, G. 1992. 3-D Surface Description from Binocular Stereo. IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, pp. 981–994.Google Scholar
  12. Cohen, F., Cooper, D., Silverman, J., and Hinkle, E. 1984. Simple parallel hierarchical relaxation algorithms for segmenting textured images based on noncausal Markovian random field models. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Pattern Recognition, Montreal, Canada, pp. 1104–1107.Google Scholar
  13. Cox, I.J., Hingorani, S., Maggs, B.M., and Rao, S.B. 1992. Stereo without disparity gradient smoothing: A Bayesian sensor fusion solution. In D. Hogg and R. Boyle, (eds.) British Machine Vision Conference. Springer-Verlag, pp. 337–346.Google Scholar
  14. Cross, G. and Jain, A. 1983. Markov random field texture models. IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 5:25–39.Google Scholar
  15. Geiger, D. and Girosi, F., Parallel and deterministic algorithms from MRF's: Surface reconstruction, IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and machine Intelligence, 13(5):401–412.Google Scholar
  16. Geiger, D., Ladendorf, B., and Yuille, A. 1992. Occlusions in binocular stereo. In Proc. European Conf. on Computer Vision, Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy.Google Scholar
  17. Geman, S. and Geman, D. 1984. Stochastic relaxation, Gibbs distribution and the Bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and machine Intelligence, 6:721–741.Google Scholar
  18. Gennery, D. 1980. Modelling the Environment of an Exploring Vehicle by Means of Stereo Vision, Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  19. Grenander, U. 1981. Lectures on Pattern Theory, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  20. Grimson, W. 1981. From Images to Surfaces. MIT Press: Cambridge, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Harris, J. 1989. The coupled depth/slope approach to surface reconstruction. Technical Report, MIT AI Lab Memo TR-908, MIT, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  22. Henderson, R., Miller, W., and Grosch, C. 1979. Automatic stereo recognition of man-made targets. Soc. Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers.Google Scholar
  23. Intille, S. and Bobick, A. 1994. Disparity-space images and large occlusion stereo. In Proc. European Conf. on Computer Vision, pp. 179–186.Google Scholar
  24. Jones, D. and Malik, J. 1992. A computational framework for determining stereo correspondence from a set of linear spatial filters. In Proc. European Conf. on Computer Vision, Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy.Google Scholar
  25. Julesz, B. 1971. Foundations of Cyclopean Perception. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kato, Z., Berthod, M., and Zerubia, J. 1993. Multiscale markov random field models for parallel image classification. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Computer Vision, pp. 253–257.Google Scholar
  27. Lawson, R. and Gulick, W. 1967. Stereopsis and anomalous contour, Vision Research, 7:271–291.Google Scholar
  28. Leonardo da Vinci 1989. Leonardo On Painting. Yale University Press: Kemp, M. (Ed.).Google Scholar
  29. Lucas, B. and Kanade, T. 1981. An interative image registration technique with an application to stereo vision. In Proc. of the 7th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 674–679.Google Scholar
  30. Marr, D. 1982. Vision. Freeman: San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  31. Marr, D. and Poggio, T. 1976. Cooperative computation of stereo disparity, Science, 194: 283–287.Google Scholar
  32. Marr, D. and Poggio, T. 1979. A computational theory of human stereo vision. Proc. R. Soc. London, 204:301–328.Google Scholar
  33. Marroquin, J., Mitter, S., and Poggio, T. 1987. Probabilistic solutions of ill-posed problems in computational vision. J. of the Am. Stat. Soc., 82(397):76–89.Google Scholar
  34. Matthies, L. 1992. Stereo vision for planetary rovers: Stochastic modeling to near real-time implementation. In Journal of Computer Vision, 8(1):71–91.Google Scholar
  35. Mumford, D. and Shah, J. 1985. Boundary detection by minimising functionals. In Proc. Conf. Computer Vision and Patter Recognition, Vol. 22.Google Scholar
  36. Nakayama, K. and Shimojo, S. 1980. Da Vinci stereopsis: Depth and subjective occluding contours from unpaired image points. Vision Research, 30:1811–1825.Google Scholar
  37. Obta, Y. and Kanade, T. 1985. Stereo by intra- and inter-scan line search using dynamic programming. IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 7(2):139–154.Google Scholar
  38. Poggio, T., Torre, V., and Koch, C. 1985. Computational vision and regularisation theory. Nature, 317:314–319.Google Scholar
  39. Pollard, S., Mayhew, J., and Frisby, J. 1985. PMF: A stereo correspondence algorithm using a disparity gradient. Perception, 14:449–470.Google Scholar
  40. Szeliski, R. 1989. A Bayesian Modeling of Uncertainty in Low-level Vision, Kluwer Academic Press: Boston.Google Scholar
  41. Wahba, G. 1990. Spline models for observational data. In CBMS-NSF, Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  42. Wildes, R. 1991. Direct recovery of three-dimensional scene geometry from binocular stereo disparity: IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, pp. 761–774.Google Scholar
  43. Yang, Y., Yuille, A., and Lu, J. 1993. Local, global, and multilevel stereo matching. In Proc. Conf. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, New York.Google Scholar
  44. Yuille, A. 1989. Energy functions for early vision and analog networks. Biological Cybernetics, 61:115–123.Google Scholar
  45. Zhang, Z. and Faugeras, O. 1992. 3-D Dynamic Scene Analysis: A Stereo Based Approach, Springer-Verlag: Berlin.Google Scholar
  46. Zhang, Z., Deriche, R., Luong, L.T., and Faugeras, O. 1994. A robust approach to image matching: Recovery of the epipolar geometry. In Proc. European Conf. on Computer Vision, pp. 179–186.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter N. Belhumeur
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Systems Science, Department of Electrical EngineeringYale UniversityNew Haven

Personalised recommendations