Advertisement

Interacting Subsystems for Depth Perception and Detour Behavior

  • Michael A. Arbib
Conference paper
Part of the Research Notes in Neural Computing book series (NEURALCOMPUTING, volume 1)

Abstract

Where many models of depth perception focus on the processing of disparity cues alone, we here present two models of depth perception, the Cue Interaction model and the Prey-Localization Model, which involve cooperative computation using both disparity and accomodation as sources of depth information. We then introduce models of detour behavior in which such depth schemas can function as subsystems.

Keywords

Depth Perception Depth Estimate Motor Schema Perceptual Schema Visuomotor Coordination 
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. Amari, S-I, Arbib, M A (1977) Competition and cooperation in neural nets. In: Metzler, J (ed) Systems neuroscience. Academic Press, London, New York, pp 119–165Google Scholar
  2. Arbib, M A (1981) Perceptual structures and distributed motor control. In: Brooks, V B (ed) Handbook of physiology — The nervous system H, Motor control. American Physiological Society, Bethesda MD, pp 1449–1480Google Scholar
  3. Arbib, M.A. (1982) Modelling neural mechanisms of visuomotor coordination in frog and toad. In Competition and Cooperation in Neural Nets (S. Amari and M.A. Arbib, Eds.), Lecture Notes in Biomathematics Vol. 45, Springer-Verlag, pp, 342–370.Google Scholar
  4. Arbib, M A (1987) Levels of modeling of mechanisms of visually guided behavior. Beh. Brain Sci 10:407–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arbib, M A (in press) The Metaphorical Brain 2: An Introduction to Schema Theory and Neural Networks Wiley Interscience., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Arbib, M A, House, D H (1987) Depth and detours: an essay on visually-guided behavior. In: Arbib, M A, Hanson, A R (eds) Vision, brain, and cooperative computation. A Bradford Book/MIT Press, Cambridge,MA pp 129–163Google Scholar
  7. Arkin, R.C., 1988, Neuroscience in motion: the application of schema theory to mobile robotics, in Visuomotor Coordination: Amphibians, Comparisons, Models, and Robots (J.-P. Ewert and M.A. Arbib, Eds.), Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  8. Caine, H S, Gruberg, E R (1985) Ablation of nucleus isthmi leads to loss of specific visually guided behavior in the frog Rana pipiens. Neurosci Lett 54:307–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cervantes-Perez, F (1985) Modelling and analysis of neural networks in the visuomotor system of anuran amphibia. Ph.D. Thesis and COINS Technical Report 85-27, Computer and Information Science Department, Univ of Massachusetts at Amherst MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Chipalkatti, R, Arbib, M A (1987a) The prey localization model: a stability analysis, Biol Cyber. 57:287–300.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chipalkatti, R, Arbib, M A (1987a) The cue interaction model of depth perception: a stability analysis. J Math Biol (in press)Google Scholar
  12. Collett, T. (1977) Stereopsis in toads Nature 267:349–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Collett, T (1982) Do toads plan routes? A study of the detour behaviour of Bufo Viridis. J Comp Physiol 146:261–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Collett, T., (1987) Binocular depth vision in arthropods, Trends in Neuroscience, Volume 10, Number 1, pp. 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Collett, T., and Udin, S. (1983)The role of the toad’s nucleus isthmi in prey-catching behaviour. Proceedings of second workshop on visuomotor coordination in frog and toad: Models and Experiments (R. Lara and Arbib, M.A., Eds). COINS-Technical Report 83-19, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  16. Collett, T.S., Udin, S.B. and Finch, D.J.(1986) A possible mechanism for stereopsis in anurans.Google Scholar
  17. Dev, P. (1975) Perception of depth surfaces in random-dot stereograms: A neural model Int. J. Man-Machine Studies 7:511–528.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Didday, R L (1970) The simulation and modelling of distributed information processing in the frog visual system. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  19. Didday, R. (1976) A model of visuomotor mechanisms in the frog optic tectum. Math Biosci 30:169–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Epstein, S (1979) Vermin users manual. Unpublished MS Thesis, Department of Computer and Information Science, Univ of Massachusetts at Amherst MAGoogle Scholar
  21. Hirai, Y., and Fukushima, K. (1978) An inference upon the neural network finding binocular correspondence Biol. Cybernetics, 31:209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. House, D. (1982) The frog/toad depth perception system — A cooperative/competitive model In Proceedings of the workshop on visuomotor coordination in frog and toad: Models and Experiments (Arbib, M.A., Ed.). COINS Technical Report 82-16, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  23. House, D. (1984) Neural Models of Depth Perception in Frog and Toad, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Massachusetts at AmherstGoogle Scholar
  24. House, D (1988) A model of the visual localization of prey by frog and toad. Biol Cyber 58: 173–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ingle, D. (1976) Spatial visions in anurans. In: K. Fite (ed) The amphibian visual system, Academic Press: New York, pp 119–140Google Scholar
  26. Ingle, D J (1983) Visual mechanisms of optic tectum and pretectum related to stimulus localization in frogs and toads. In: J-P Ewert, Capranica, R R, Ingle, D J (eds) Advances in vertebrate neuroethology. Plenum Press, New York, pp 111–226Google Scholar
  27. Julesz, B. (1971) Foundations of Cyclopean Perception Chicago: Univ. of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  28. Lara, R, Arbib, M A (1982) A neural model of interaction between tectum and pretectum in prey selection. Cognition and Brain Theory 5:149–171Google Scholar
  29. Lara, R, Arbib, M A, Cromarty, A S (1982) The role of the tectal column in facilitation of amphibian prey-catching behaviour: a neural model. J Neurosci 2: 521–530Google Scholar
  30. Lara, R, Carmona, M, Daza, F, Cruz, A (1984) A global model of the neural mechanisms responsible for visuomotor coordination in toads. J Th Biol 110:587–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marr, D., and Poggio, T. (1977) Cooperative computation of stereo disparity. Science 194: 283–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Marr, D. and Poggio, T. (1979) A computational theory of human stereopsis, Proc. Roy. Soc. Ser. B, 204:301–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mayhew, J.E.W. and J.P. Frisby (1981) Towards a Computational and Psychophysical Theory of Stereopsis, Artificial Intelligence, 17:349–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nelson, J.I.(1975) Globality and stereoscopic fusion in binocular visionJ. Th Bio. 49: 1–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Prazdny, K.(1985) Detection of Binocular Disparities, Biol Cybern. 52:387–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Prazdny, K. (1987) On the coarse-to-fine strategy in stereomatching, Bull. Psychonomic Soc., 25:92–94.Google Scholar
  37. Rössel, S. (1983) Nature 302:821–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sperling, G. (1970) Binocular vision: a physical and a neural theory Am. J. Psych. 83: 461–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael A. Arbib
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Neural EngineeringUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations