Abstract
Panoramic image differences can be used for view-based homing under natural outdoor conditions, because they increase smoothly with distance from a reference location (Zeil et al., J Opt Soc Am A 20(3):450–469, 2003). The particular shape, slope and depth of such image difference functions (IDFs) recorded at any one place, however, depend on a number of factors that so far have only been qualitatively identified. Here we show how the shape of difference functions depends on the depth structure and the contrast of natural scenes, by quantifying the depth- distribution of different outdoor scenes and by comparing it to the difference functions calculated with differently processed panoramic images, which were recorded at the same locations. We find (1) that IDFs and catchment areas become systematically wider as the average distance of objects increases, (2) that simple image processing operations—like subtracting the local mean, difference-of-Gaussian filtering and local contrast normalization—make difference functions robust against changes in illumination and the spurious effects of shadows, and (3) by comparing depth-dependent translational and depth-independent rotational difference functions, we show that IDFs of contrast-normalized snapshots are predominantly determined by the depth-structure and possibly also by occluding contours in a scene. We propose a model for the shape of IDFs as a tool for quantitative comparisons between the shapes of these functions in different scenes.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baddeley R (1997) The correlational structure of natural images and the calibration of spatial representations. Cogn Sci 21:351–372
Brünnert U, Kelber A, Zeil J (1994) Ground-nesting bees determine the distance of their nest from a landmark by other than angular size cues. J Comp Physiol A 175:363–369
Carandini M, Heeger D, Movshon J (1997) Linearity and normalization in simple cells of the macaque primary visual cortex. J Neurosci 17:8621–8644
Cartwright B, Collett T (1983) Landmark learning in bees: experiments and models. J Comp Physiol 15:521–543
Cartwright B, Collett T (1987) Landmark maps for honeybees. Biol Cybern 57:85–93
Chahl J, Srinivasan M (1997) Reflective surfaces for panoramic imaging. Appl Optics 36:8275–8285
Collett T (1995) Making learning easy: the acquisition of visual information during the orientation flights of social wasps. J Comp Physiol A 177:737–747
Collett T, Lehrer M (1993) Looking and learning: a spatial pattern in the orientation flight of the wasp Vespula vulgaris. Proc R Soc Lond B 252:129–134
Collett T, Zeil J (1997a) Flights of learning. Curr Dir Psych Sci 5: 149–155
Collett T, Zeil J (1997b) Selection and use of landmarks by insects. In: Lehrer M (ed) Orientation and communication in arthropods. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, pp 41–65
Collett T, Zeil J (1998) Places and landmarks: an arthropod perspective. In: Healy S (ed) Spatial representation in animals. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 18–53
Fleet D, Heeger D, Wagner H (1996) Modeling binocular neurons in primary visual cortex. In: Jenkin M, Harris L (eds) Computational and biological mechanisms of visual coding. Cambridge University Press, London, pp 103–130
Franz M, Mallot H (2000) Biomimetic robot navigation. Rob Auton Syst 30:133–153
Franz M, Schölkopf B, Mallot H, Bülthoff H (1998) Where did I take that snapshot? Scene based homing by image matching. Biol Cybern 79:191–202
Gaussier P, Joulain C, Banquet J, Leprêtre S, Revel A (2000) The visual homing problem: an example of robotics/biology cross fertilization. Rob Auton Syst 30:155–180
Giurfa M, Capaldi E (1999) Vectors, routes and maps: new discoveries about navigation in insects. Trends Neurosci 22:237–242
van Hateren H (1992) Theoretical predictions of spatiotemporal receptive fields of fly LMCs. J Comp Physiol A 171:157–170
van Hateren H (1993) Three modes of spatiotemporal processing by eyes. J Comp Physiol A 172:583–591
Junger W (1991) Waterstriders (Gerris paludum F.) compensate for drift with a discontinuously working visual position servo. J Comp Physiol A 169:633–639
Lehrer M (1993) Why do bees turn back and look?. J Comp Physiol A 172:549–563
Lehrer M, Collett T (1994) Approaching and departing bees learn different cues to the distance of a landmark. J Comp Physiol A 175: 171–177
Möller R (2002) Insects could exploit UV-green contrast for landmark navigation. J Theor Biol 214:619–663
Nicholson D, Judd S, Cartwritght B, Collett T (1999) Learning walks and landmark guidance in wood ants (Formica rufa). J Exp Biol 202:1831–1838
Osorio D, Vorobyev M (2005) Photoreceptor spectral sensitivities in terrestrial animals: adaptations for luminance and colour vision. Proc R Soc B 272:1745–1752
Srinivasan M, Laughlin S, Dubs A (1982) Predictive coding: a fresh view of inhibition in the retina. Proc R Soc Lond B 216:427–459
Szenher M (2005) Visual homing in natural environments. In: Nehmzow U, Melhuish C, Witkowski M (eds) Towards autonomous robotic systems (TAROS-05), p 221
Vardy A, Möller R (2005) Biologically plausible visual homing methods based on optical flow techniques. Connect Sci 17:47–89
Vladusich T, Hemmi J, Srinivasan M, Zeil J (2005) Interactions of visual odometry and landmark guidance during food search in honeybees. J Exp Biol 208:4123–4135
Voss R, Zeil J (1998) Active vision in insects: an analysis of object-directed zig-zag flights in a ground-nesting wasp (Odynerus spinipes, Eumenidae). J Comp Physiol A 182:377–387
Zanker J, Zeil J (2005) Movement-induced motion signal distributions in outdoor scenes. Netw Comp Neural Syst 16:357–376
Zeil J (1993a) Orientation flights of solitary wasps (Cerceris; Sphecidae; Hymenoptera): I. Description of flight. J Comp Physiol A 172:189–205
Zeil J (1993b) Orientation flights of solitary wasps (Cerceris; Sphecidae; Hymenoptera): II. Similarities between orientation and return flights and the use of motion parallax. J Comp Physiol A 172: 207–222
Zeil J, Wittmann D (1993) Landmark orientation during the approach to the nest in the stingless bee Trigona (Tetragonisca) angustula (Apidae, Meliponinae). Insectes Sociaux 40:381–389
Zeil J, Kelber A, Voss R (1996) Structure and function of learning flights in bees and wasps. J Exp Biol 199:245–252
Zeil J, Hofmann M, Chahl J (2003) Catchment areas of panoramic snapshots in outdoor scenes. J Opt Soc Am A 20(3):450–469
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stürzl, W., Zeil, J. Depth, contrast and view-based homing in outdoor scenes. Biol Cybern 96, 519–531 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-007-0147-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-007-0147-3