Efficient Pose Estimation Using View-Based Object Representations

  • Gabriele Peters
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2626)


We present an efficient method for estimating the pose of a three-dimensional object. Its implementation is embedded in a computer vision system which is motivated by and based on cognitive principles concerning the visual perception of three-dimensional objects. Viewpoint-invariant object recognition has been subject to controversial discussions for a long time. An important point of discussion is the nature of internal object representations. Behavioral studies with primates, which are summarized in this article, support the model of view-based object representations. We designed our computer vision system according to these findings and demonstrate that very precise estimations of the poses of real-world objects are possible even if only a few number of sample views of an object is available. The system can be used for a variety of applications.


Object Representation Virtual View Computer Vision System Inferior Temporal Pose Estimation 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. Edelman and H. H. Bülthoff. Orientation Dependence in the Recognition of Familiar and Novel Views of Three-Dimensional Objects. Vision Research, 32(12):2385–2400, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. J. Tarr. Orientation Dependence in Three-Dimensional Object Recognition. Ph.D. Thesis, MIT, 1989.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. Cutzu and S. Edelman. Canonical Views in Object Representation and Recognition. Vision Research, 34:3037–3056, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    N. K. Logothetis, J. Pauls, H. H. Bülthoff, and Poggio T. View-Dependent Object Recognition by Monkeys. Current Biology, 4:401–414, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Wexler, S. M. Kosslyn, and A. Berthoz. Motor processes in mental rotation. Cognition, 68: 77–94, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    N. K. Logothetis, J. Pauls, and Poggio T. Shape Representation in the Inferior Temporal Cortex of Monkeys. Current Biology, 5(5):552–563, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. C. Burr, M. C. Morrone, and D. Spinelli. Evidence for Edge and Bar Detectors in Human Vision. Vision Research, 29(4):419–431, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. P. Jones and L. A. Palmer. An evaluation of the two-dimensional gabor filter model of simple receptive fields in cat striate cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 58(6):1233–1258, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Eckes and J. C. Vorbrüggen. Combining Data-Driven and Model-Based Cues for Segmentation of Video Sequences. In Proc. WCNN96, pages 868–875, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Maurer and C. von der Malsburg. Tracking and Learning Graphs and Pose on Image Sequences of Faces. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Automatic Face-and Gesture-Recognition, pages 176–181, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. Chvatal. A Greedy Heuristic for the Set-Covering Problem. Mathematics of Operations Research, 4(3):233–235, 1979.zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Horaud, B. Conio, O. Leboulleux, and B. Lacolle. An Analytic Solution for the Perspective 4-Point Problem. Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing, 47:33–44, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Dhome, M. Richetin, J. Lapreste, and G. Rives. Determination of the Attitude of 3-D Objects from a Single Perspective View. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 11(12):1265–1278, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. M. Haralick, C. Lee, K. Ottenberg, and M. Nölle. Analysis and Solutions of the Three Point Perspective Pose Estimation Problem. In Proc. of the IEEE Comp. Society Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 592–598, 1991.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. G. Lowe. Three-Dimensional Object Recognition from Single Two-Dimensional Images. Artificial Intelligence, 31:355–395, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Yuan. A General Photogrammetric Method for Determining Object Position and Orientation. IEEE Journal of Robotics and Automation, 5(2):129–142, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Pötzsch. Die Behandlung der Wavelet-Transformation von Bildern in der Nähe von Objektkanten. Technical Report IRINI 94-04, Institut für Neuroinformatik, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. Ullman and R. Basri. Recognition by Linear Combinations of Models. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 13(10):992–1006, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    G. Peters and C. von der Malsburg. View Reconstruction by Linear Combination of Sample Views. In Proc. BMVC 2001, pages 223–232, 2001.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Lades, J. C. Vorbrüggen, J. Buhmann, J. Lange, C. von der Malsburg, R. P. Würtz, and W. Konen. Distortion Invariant Object Recognition in the Dynamic Link Architecture. IEEE Trans. Comp., 42: 300–311, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    G. Peters. A View-Based Approach to Three-Dimensional Object Perception. Ph.D. Thesis, Shaker Verlag, Aachen, Germany, 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriele Peters
    • 1
  1. 1.Informatik VIIUniversität DortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations