We tested shape constancy from novel views in the case of binocular viewing, using a variety of stimuli, including polyhedra, polygonal lines, and points in 3-D. The results of the psychophysical experiments show that constraints such as planarity of surface contours and symmetry are critical for reliable shape constancy. These results are consistent with the results obtained in our previous psychophysical experiments on shape constancy from novel views in the presence of a kinetic depth effect (Pizlo & Stevenson, 1999). On the basis of these results, we developed a new model of binocular shape reconstruction. The model is based on the assumption that binocular reconstruction is a difficult inverse problem, whose solution requires imposing a priori constraints on the family of possible interpretations. In the model, binocular disparity is used to correct monocularly reconstructed shape. The new model was tested on the same shapes as those used in the psychophysical experiments. The reconstructions produced by this model are substantially more reliable than the reconstructions produced by models that do not use constraints. Interestingly, monocular (but not binocular) reconstructions produced by this model correlate well with both monocular and binocular performance of human subjects. This fact suggests that binocular and monocular reconstructions of shapes in the human visual system involve similar mechanisms based on monocular shape constraints.
Anstis S. M. (1974). A chart demonstrating variations in acuity with retinal position.Vision Research,14, 589–592.
Attneave F., &Frost, R. (1969). The determination of perceived tridimensional orientation by minimum criteria.Perception & Psychophysics,6, 391–396.
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition by components: A theory of human image understanding.Psychological Review,94, 115–147.
Biederman, I., &Gerhardstein, P. C. (1993). Recognizing depthrotated objects: Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 1162–1182.
Chan, M. W. (1999).A psychologically plausible algorithm for binocular shape reconstruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University.
Chan, M. W., Pizlo, Z., &Chelberg, D. M. (1999). Binocular shape reconstruction: Psychological plausibility of the 8-point algorithm.Computer Vision & Image Understanding,74, 121–137.
Faugeras, O. (1993).Three-dimensional computer vision: A geometric viewpoint. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hartley, R. I., &Sturm, P. (1997). Triangulation.Computer Vision & Image Understanding,68, 146–157.
Hochberg, J., &Brooks, V. (1960). The psychophysics of form: Reversible perspective drawings of spatial objects.American Journal of Psychology,73, 337–355.
Hochberg, J., &McAlister, E. (1953). A quantitative approach to figural ‘goodness.’Journal of Experimental Psychology,46, 361–364.
Julesz, B. (1971).Foundations of cyclopean perception. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Kersten, D., Mamassian, P., &Yuille, A. (2004). Object perception as Bayesian inference.Annual Review of Psychology,55, 271–304.
Koenderink, J. J., van Doorn, A. J., &Kappers, A. M. L. (1992). Surface perception in pictures.Perception & Psychophysics,52, 487–496.
Leclerc, Y. G. (1989). Constructing simple stable descriptions for image partitioning.International Journal of Computer Vision,3, 73–102.
Leclerc, Y. G., &Fischler, M. A. (1992). An optimization-based approach to the interpretation of single line drawings as 3-D wire frames.International Journal of Computer Vision,9, 113–136.
Levi, D. M., &Klein, S. A. (1990). The role of separation and eccentricity in encoding position.Vision Research,30, 557–585.
Liu, Z., &Kersten, D. (2003). Three-dimensional symmetric shapes are discriminated more efficiently than asymmetric ones.Journal of the Optical Society of America A,20, 1331–1340.
Longuet-Higgins, H. C. (1981). A computer algorithm for reconstructing a scene from two projections.Nature,293, 133–135.
Macmillan, N. A., &Creelman, C. D. (2005).Detection theory: A user's guide (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marill, T. (1991). Emulating the human interpretation of line-drawings as three-dimensional objects.International Journal of Computer Vision,6, 147–161.
McKee, S. P., Levi, D. M., &Bowne, S. F. (1990). The imprecision of stereopsis.Vision Research,30, 1763–1779.
Mitchison, G. (1988). Planarity and segmentation in stereoscopic matching.Perception,17, 753–782.
Norman, J. F., Todd, J. T., Perotti, V. J., &Tittle, J. S. (1996). The visual perception of three-dimensional length.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 173–186.
Perkins, D. N. (1972). Visual discrimination between rectangular and nonrectangular parallelopipeds.Perception & Psychophysics,12, 396–400.
Perkins, D. N. (1982). The perceiver as organizer and geometer. In J. Beck (Ed.),Organization and representation in perception (pp. 73–93). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pizlo, Z. (2001). Perception viewed as an inverse problem: A minireview.Vision Research,41, 3145–3161.
Pizlo, Z., Li, Y., &Chan, M. (2005). Regularization model of human binocular vision. InProceedings of IS&T/SPIE Conference on Computational Imaging (Vol. 5674, pp. 229–240). Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optical Engineering.
Pizlo, Z., Li, Y., &Francis, G. (2005). A new look at binocular stereopsis.Vision Research,45, 2244–2255.
Pizlo, Z., Rosenfeld, A., &Epelboim, J. (1995). An exponential pyramid model of the time-course of size processing.Vision Research,35, 1089–1107.
Pizlo, Z., Rosenfeld, A., &Weiss, I. (1995). Interdisciplinary study of visual invariants. In D. Dori & A. Bruckstein (Eds.),Shape, structure and pattern recognition (pp. 118–127). Singapore: World Scientific.
Pizlo, Z., Rosenfeld, A., &Weiss, I. (1997). The geometry of visual space: About the incompatibility between science and mathematics. Dialogue.Computer Vision & Image Understanding,65, 425–433.
Pizlo, Z., &Stevenson, A. K. (1999). Shape constancy from novel views.Perception & Psychophysics,61, 1299–1307.
Poggio, T., Torre, V., &Koch, C. (1985). Computational vision and regularization theory.Nature,317, 314–319.
Pomerantz, J. R., &Kubovy, M. (1986). Theoretical approaches to perceptual organization. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.),Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. 2. Cognitive processes and performance (pp. 36-1 to 36–46). New York: Wiley.
Rawlings, S. C., &Shipley, T. (1969). Stereoscopic acuity and horizontal angular distance from fixation.Journal of the Optical Society of America,59, 991–993.
Regan, D. (2000). Human perception of objects. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.
Rock, I., &DiVita, J. (1987). A case of viewer-centered object perception.Cognitive Psychology,19, 280–293.
Rock, I., Wheeler, D., &Tudor, L. (1989). Can we imagine how objects look from other viewpoints?Cognitive Psychology,21, 185–210.
Shepard, R. N., &Cooper, L. A. (1982).Mental images and their transformations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sinha, P., &Adelson, E. H. (1992). Recovery of 3-D shape from 2-D wireframe drawings [Abstract].Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science,33, 825.
Tjan, B. S., &Legge, G. E. (1998). The viewpoint complexity of an object-recognition task.Vision Research,38, 2335–2350.
Vetter, T., Poggio, T., &Bülthoff, H. H. (1994). The importance of symmetry and virtual views in three-dimensional object recognition.Current Biology,4, 18–23.
Witkin, A., Terzopoulos, D., &Kaas, M. (1987). Signal matching through scale space.International Journal of Computer Vision,1, 133–144.
About this article
Cite this article
Chan, M.W., Stevenson, A.K., Li, Y. et al. Binocular shape constancy from novel views: The role of a priori constraints. Perception & Psychophysics 68, 1124–1139 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193715
- Mental Rotation
- Retinal Image
- Binocular Disparity
- Polygonal Line
- Psychophysical Experiment