MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515775949 · doi:10.1167/16.12.198

Depth discrimination from occlusions in 3D clutter scenes

2016· article· en· W2515775949 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterParallaxDepth perceptionArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceVisibilityContext (archaeology)Sensory cueGeologyPerceptionPsychologyRadarOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objects such as trees, shrubs, and tall grass typically consist of thousands of small surfaces that are distributed randomly over a 3D volume. Despite the common occurrence of such 3D clutter in natural scenes, relatively little is known about how well humans can perceive depths of surfaces within such 3D clutter. Previous studies have concentrated on motion parallax and binocular disparity cues and have asked questions such as how many discrete depth planes can be perceived, and what is the depth-to-width ratio. However, these studies are incomplete because they have ignored occlusions which are omnipresent in such scenes. Here we present a depth discrimination experiment that examines occlusion cues directly. The task is to discriminate the depths of two red target surfaces in a 3D field of random gray distractors. The experiment uses an Oculus Rift DK2 display which allows us to control motion parallax and binocular disparity cues. The clutter itself provides two occlusion-based depth cues. The first is a 'visibility cue', namely, the target that is less visible is more likely to be deeper within the clutter [Langer and Mannan, JOSA 2012]. The second is a 'context cue', namely the target with the deepest occluder is itself more likely to be deeper. We define scene classes with all four combinations of visibility and occlusion cues and use staircases to measure depth discrimination thresholds. Our results show that observers use both visibility and context cues to perform the task, even when stereo and motion parallax cues are also present. To our knowledge, this is the first experiment to examine depth from occlusions in 3D clutter and to identify the important role played by visibility and context cues in solving this natural problem. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2016

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it