形状、空间关系和角度对三维物体识别的启动效应
|
摘要
物体识别一直是高水平视觉研究的焦点和前沿课题。物体识别是人类赖以生存的重要能力,人类的一切适应性活动都需要物体识别的参与才能正常进行。三维物体识别的研究不仅有助于人们全面理解物体表征的认知特点和规律,也有助于人们深入认识人类视觉加工的基本模式,在许多领域还具有重要的应用价值。
现有的物体识别研究,大多聚焦在对二维实验材料的研究和分析上。然而,现实生活中我们更多看到的是三维物体。虽然研究者们已经在物体识别领域做了大量卓有成效的工作,他们提出的模型也已经建构了物体识别的整体框架,并能合理地说明许多物体识别现象。但是在很多方面,以物体为中心理论和以观察者为中心理论在对物体识别的解释上都存在着争议,并且任何一方都不能完整地说明物体识别的所有心理表征现象。
在以往研究的基础上,本研究以物体识别的两大理论为主要框架,融合新旧学习再认范式、启动范式和掩蔽范式,自制三维物体实验材料,采用同一范畴内的认同任务和不同范畴间的分类判断任务,探讨形状、空间关系和角度对三维物体识别的启动效应;验证、补充并扩展物体识别的认知加工机制,展望物体识别理论之间的融合趋势及融合存在的困难,同时为探索人类高水平视觉的本质及其开发利用奠定实验基础。
本研究通过五个系列实验考察了形状、空间关系和角度对三维物体识别的启动效应。
实验一采用新旧再认学习范式,设置不同的照明强度,探讨照明对三维物体识别的影响,考察物体的知觉恒常性,为后续的实验提供研究出发点。并设置不同的分离水平,探讨组成部分的空间结构对三维物体识别的影响,验证以物体为中心理论的观点。
实验二采用启动范式下的分类判断任务,设置三种不同的刺激呈现时间间隔ISI,一方面继续考察组成部分之间的三种分离水平对三维物体识别的影响,另一方面通过三种不同的启动方式深入考察组成部分对物体识别的启动效应。
实验三采用启动范式下的分类判断任务,操纵物体的大小和物体出现的空间位置,一方面继续考察组成部分对三维物体识别的结构启动效应;另一方面设置远、相同和近三种空间距离深入考察空间位置关系对三维物体识别的启动效应。
实验四采用在左右两侧视野呈现实验材料的学习再认范式和掩蔽范式,操纵小几何体的形状和刺激组成部分的空间关系,设置两种类型的分心刺激,考察组成部分和空间关系对三维物体识别的启动效应,验证以物体为中心理论的观点。
实验五采用与实验四相同的实验范式,操纵目标刺激的旋转方式和旋转角度,设置两种刺激类型、两种旋转方式、以及由物体类型和角度类型组合而成的四种模式,分别在间接任务和直接任务下考察旋转角度对三维物体识别的启动效应,验证以观察者为中心理论的观点。
综合五个系列实验的结果及相关讨论,本研究支持以下结论:
1照明强度对三维物体的识别效果不产生影响。
2形状对三维物体的识别有启动效应。其中,组成部分的分离水平对物体识别绩效的影响呈现出层级式特点,不分离水平快于半分离水平,半分离水平又快于全分离水平。部分启动效应和整体启动效应同时存在,其中,组成部分的小几何体对物体识别的影响要稍大一些,部分启动效应的大小与刺激呈现时间间隔ISI的长短有关,时间间隔越长,部分对物体识别的启动效应越小。
3启动刺激和目标刺激出现的位置以及这两个刺激之间的空间距离对物体的识别均有影响。空间距离越远,对三维物体识别的影响越大。
4组成部分的小几何体的空间排列关系对三维物体的识别有启动作用。空间排列关系变化越大,物体识别的速度越慢。
5间接任务和直接任务中均存在角度启动效应。其中,当呈现的样例相同时,不仅学习角度和再认角度一样的情况下,有意识关注角度的识别速度快于无意识不关注角度的识别速度,而且在学习角度和再认角度不一样的情况下,有意识关注角度的识别速度也快于不关注角度的识别速度。当识别的两个物体属于不同的范畴时,只要呈现的角度相同,识别物体的成绩也优于角度不同时。角度启动效应的大小受到物体旋转方式的影响,旋转方式(如三维深度旋转)与日常生活经验越接近,旋转角度对识别的影响越小。
Object recognition has always being the frontline and the focus of the high-level visual studies. Object recognition is an important ability in human daily life,Adaptation of all human activities dependent on the participation of object recognition that the life can be carried out normally.The study of three-dimensional object recognition will not only help us fully understand the basic characteristics and the law of object identification in nature,but also help us deeply explain the basic models and laws of the human visual processing,there are also many important applied areas.
Most of the existing studies in object recognition are focused on the two-dimensional experiments whether the research materials or result analysis.However,we live in a real world,much of what we saw is more three-dimensional objects.Researchers have done a great deal of work in this field,their models have already built a general framework of object recognition,and can reasonably explain the phenomena of many object recognition.But the object-centered theory and the view-centered theory are debate in many aspects of the interpretation of object recognition.So far,none of them can be completely described the phenomena of mental representation of the object recognition.
On the basis of past researches,the main purpose of this study is:Refer two main theories of object recognition as the main framework;Integrate the old and the new learning paradigm,the priming paradigm with the mask paradigm;To make three-dimensional objects as experimental materials;Adopted identify task and classification task;Analysis the priming effect of the shape, spatial relation and view on the three-dimensional object recognition;Verify,complement and expand the cognitive processing mechanisms of object recognition;Explore the trend of the integration between two theories and the difficulties of the integration;At the same time,Establish experimental basis for researching the essence of human high-level vision and its development and utilization.
Five experiments were conducted to find out features of priming:Shape,spatial relation and view effects on three-dimensional object recognition.
Experiment 1 used the old and the new learning recognition paradigm,setted different lighting intensity to investigate the effects of lighting in object recognition,examined the perceptual constancy and to prepare for the next experiment;and setted three different levels of displacement to explore the effects of Geometric ions'(goens') spatial relation and to verify the viewpoint of the object-centered theory.
Experiment 2 used the priming paradigm in the classification task,setted three different ISI,On the one hand,continue to investigate the effects of different levels of displacement in three-dimensional object recognition;On the other hand,More deeply to explore the effects of the component of object through three different priming methods.
Experiment 3 continue to used the priming paradigm in the classification task,and manipulated the size and the spatial location of objects,On the one hand,continue to examine the effects of the part and the global in three-dimensional object recognition;on the other hand,deeply to study the effects of the spatial relation on three-dimensional object recognition through three different space distance.
Experiment 4 used the learning and recognized paradigm and the mask paradigm,and manipulated the shape of geons and the spatial relation among geons,setted two different distract stimulus to study the priming effects of part and spatial relation,and to verify the viewpoint of the object-centered theory.
Experiment 5 used the same experimental paradigm as experiment 4,and manipulated the rotational ways and rotational views of the tar stimulus,setted two stimulus types and two rotational ways and four combined models,used the indirect and direct tasks to study the priming effects of view in object recognition,and to verify the viewpoint of the view-centered theory.
Colligate the results of the five series experiments and the related discussions,this study support the following conclusions:
1 The luminance contrast didn't have effect on the three-dimensional object recognition.
2 The shape of objects has effected on the three-dimensional object recognition.The three different levels of displacement of the two components has effected on the object recognition,and the impact is a hierarchy,the 'no displacement' condition was significantly faster than the 'half displacement' condition,the 'half displacement' condition was also faster than the 'full displacement' condition;The part priming effect and the global priming effect were both found; Small goens of the object has a larger effect on the object recognition;The priming effect of part is related to ISI,the longer time interval,the smaller priming effects of the part in the three-dimensional object recognition.
3 The position of the prime stimulus and the tar stimulus and the distance between them have effected on the three-dimensional object recognition.The farther is the space distance,the larger is the impact on the object recognition.
4 The spatial relation of the small geons has the priming effect on the object recognition.The larger is the changes of the spatial relation,the more slowly is the speed of the object recognition.
5 There were both view priming effect in direct task and indirect task.When the samples within the same categories are also same,the recognition of object in explicit task was faster than in implicit task,regardless of the view of the object is the same or not in study test.When the samples come from different categories,the recognition of objects in the same view has also been better than not in the same view.The size of priming effect is affected by the rotational ways of the object,the rotational ways(three-dimensional spatial rotation) is closer to the daily experience,the priming effect is smaller.
现有的物体识别研究,大多聚焦在对二维实验材料的研究和分析上。然而,现实生活中我们更多看到的是三维物体。虽然研究者们已经在物体识别领域做了大量卓有成效的工作,他们提出的模型也已经建构了物体识别的整体框架,并能合理地说明许多物体识别现象。但是在很多方面,以物体为中心理论和以观察者为中心理论在对物体识别的解释上都存在着争议,并且任何一方都不能完整地说明物体识别的所有心理表征现象。
在以往研究的基础上,本研究以物体识别的两大理论为主要框架,融合新旧学习再认范式、启动范式和掩蔽范式,自制三维物体实验材料,采用同一范畴内的认同任务和不同范畴间的分类判断任务,探讨形状、空间关系和角度对三维物体识别的启动效应;验证、补充并扩展物体识别的认知加工机制,展望物体识别理论之间的融合趋势及融合存在的困难,同时为探索人类高水平视觉的本质及其开发利用奠定实验基础。
本研究通过五个系列实验考察了形状、空间关系和角度对三维物体识别的启动效应。
实验一采用新旧再认学习范式,设置不同的照明强度,探讨照明对三维物体识别的影响,考察物体的知觉恒常性,为后续的实验提供研究出发点。并设置不同的分离水平,探讨组成部分的空间结构对三维物体识别的影响,验证以物体为中心理论的观点。
实验二采用启动范式下的分类判断任务,设置三种不同的刺激呈现时间间隔ISI,一方面继续考察组成部分之间的三种分离水平对三维物体识别的影响,另一方面通过三种不同的启动方式深入考察组成部分对物体识别的启动效应。
实验三采用启动范式下的分类判断任务,操纵物体的大小和物体出现的空间位置,一方面继续考察组成部分对三维物体识别的结构启动效应;另一方面设置远、相同和近三种空间距离深入考察空间位置关系对三维物体识别的启动效应。
实验四采用在左右两侧视野呈现实验材料的学习再认范式和掩蔽范式,操纵小几何体的形状和刺激组成部分的空间关系,设置两种类型的分心刺激,考察组成部分和空间关系对三维物体识别的启动效应,验证以物体为中心理论的观点。
实验五采用与实验四相同的实验范式,操纵目标刺激的旋转方式和旋转角度,设置两种刺激类型、两种旋转方式、以及由物体类型和角度类型组合而成的四种模式,分别在间接任务和直接任务下考察旋转角度对三维物体识别的启动效应,验证以观察者为中心理论的观点。
综合五个系列实验的结果及相关讨论,本研究支持以下结论:
1照明强度对三维物体的识别效果不产生影响。
2形状对三维物体的识别有启动效应。其中,组成部分的分离水平对物体识别绩效的影响呈现出层级式特点,不分离水平快于半分离水平,半分离水平又快于全分离水平。部分启动效应和整体启动效应同时存在,其中,组成部分的小几何体对物体识别的影响要稍大一些,部分启动效应的大小与刺激呈现时间间隔ISI的长短有关,时间间隔越长,部分对物体识别的启动效应越小。
3启动刺激和目标刺激出现的位置以及这两个刺激之间的空间距离对物体的识别均有影响。空间距离越远,对三维物体识别的影响越大。
4组成部分的小几何体的空间排列关系对三维物体的识别有启动作用。空间排列关系变化越大,物体识别的速度越慢。
5间接任务和直接任务中均存在角度启动效应。其中,当呈现的样例相同时,不仅学习角度和再认角度一样的情况下,有意识关注角度的识别速度快于无意识不关注角度的识别速度,而且在学习角度和再认角度不一样的情况下,有意识关注角度的识别速度也快于不关注角度的识别速度。当识别的两个物体属于不同的范畴时,只要呈现的角度相同,识别物体的成绩也优于角度不同时。角度启动效应的大小受到物体旋转方式的影响,旋转方式(如三维深度旋转)与日常生活经验越接近,旋转角度对识别的影响越小。
Object recognition has always being the frontline and the focus of the high-level visual studies. Object recognition is an important ability in human daily life,Adaptation of all human activities dependent on the participation of object recognition that the life can be carried out normally.The study of three-dimensional object recognition will not only help us fully understand the basic characteristics and the law of object identification in nature,but also help us deeply explain the basic models and laws of the human visual processing,there are also many important applied areas.
Most of the existing studies in object recognition are focused on the two-dimensional experiments whether the research materials or result analysis.However,we live in a real world,much of what we saw is more three-dimensional objects.Researchers have done a great deal of work in this field,their models have already built a general framework of object recognition,and can reasonably explain the phenomena of many object recognition.But the object-centered theory and the view-centered theory are debate in many aspects of the interpretation of object recognition.So far,none of them can be completely described the phenomena of mental representation of the object recognition.
On the basis of past researches,the main purpose of this study is:Refer two main theories of object recognition as the main framework;Integrate the old and the new learning paradigm,the priming paradigm with the mask paradigm;To make three-dimensional objects as experimental materials;Adopted identify task and classification task;Analysis the priming effect of the shape, spatial relation and view on the three-dimensional object recognition;Verify,complement and expand the cognitive processing mechanisms of object recognition;Explore the trend of the integration between two theories and the difficulties of the integration;At the same time,Establish experimental basis for researching the essence of human high-level vision and its development and utilization.
Five experiments were conducted to find out features of priming:Shape,spatial relation and view effects on three-dimensional object recognition.
Experiment 1 used the old and the new learning recognition paradigm,setted different lighting intensity to investigate the effects of lighting in object recognition,examined the perceptual constancy and to prepare for the next experiment;and setted three different levels of displacement to explore the effects of Geometric ions'(goens') spatial relation and to verify the viewpoint of the object-centered theory.
Experiment 2 used the priming paradigm in the classification task,setted three different ISI,On the one hand,continue to investigate the effects of different levels of displacement in three-dimensional object recognition;On the other hand,More deeply to explore the effects of the component of object through three different priming methods.
Experiment 3 continue to used the priming paradigm in the classification task,and manipulated the size and the spatial location of objects,On the one hand,continue to examine the effects of the part and the global in three-dimensional object recognition;on the other hand,deeply to study the effects of the spatial relation on three-dimensional object recognition through three different space distance.
Experiment 4 used the learning and recognized paradigm and the mask paradigm,and manipulated the shape of geons and the spatial relation among geons,setted two different distract stimulus to study the priming effects of part and spatial relation,and to verify the viewpoint of the object-centered theory.
Experiment 5 used the same experimental paradigm as experiment 4,and manipulated the rotational ways and rotational views of the tar stimulus,setted two stimulus types and two rotational ways and four combined models,used the indirect and direct tasks to study the priming effects of view in object recognition,and to verify the viewpoint of the view-centered theory.
Colligate the results of the five series experiments and the related discussions,this study support the following conclusions:
1 The luminance contrast didn't have effect on the three-dimensional object recognition.
2 The shape of objects has effected on the three-dimensional object recognition.The three different levels of displacement of the two components has effected on the object recognition,and the impact is a hierarchy,the 'no displacement' condition was significantly faster than the 'half displacement' condition,the 'half displacement' condition was also faster than the 'full displacement' condition;The part priming effect and the global priming effect were both found; Small goens of the object has a larger effect on the object recognition;The priming effect of part is related to ISI,the longer time interval,the smaller priming effects of the part in the three-dimensional object recognition.
3 The position of the prime stimulus and the tar stimulus and the distance between them have effected on the three-dimensional object recognition.The farther is the space distance,the larger is the impact on the object recognition.
4 The spatial relation of the small geons has the priming effect on the object recognition.The larger is the changes of the spatial relation,the more slowly is the speed of the object recognition.
5 There were both view priming effect in direct task and indirect task.When the samples within the same categories are also same,the recognition of object in explicit task was faster than in implicit task,regardless of the view of the object is the same or not in study test.When the samples come from different categories,the recognition of objects in the same view has also been better than not in the same view.The size of priming effect is affected by the rotational ways of the object,the rotational ways(three-dimensional spatial rotation) is closer to the daily experience,the priming effect is smaller.
引文
[1] Biederman, I. Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding [J]. Psychological Review, 1987, 94 (2): 115-147.
[2] Hummel, J. E. Where view-based theories break down: the role of structure in shape perception and object recognition. cognitive dynamics:conceptual change in humans and machines[M]. Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum: 2000,157- 185.
[3] Hummel, J. E., & Biederman, I. Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition[J]. Psychological Review, 1992,99(3):480-517.
[4] Biederman, I., & Gerhardstein, P. C. Viewpoint-dependent mechanisms in visual object recognition:reply to Tarr and B(?)lthoff[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1995,21:1506-1514.
[5] Biederman, I., & Gerhardstein, P. C. Recognizing depth-rotated objects: evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1993,19(6): 1162-1182.
[6] Biederman, I. Recognizing depth-rotated objects:a review of recent research and heory[J]. Spatial Vision,2001,13:241-253.
[7] Hummel, J. E. Complementary solutions to the binding problem in vision: implications for shape perception and object recognition[J]. Visual Cognition,2001,(8):489-517.
[8] Tanaka, K. Neuronal mechanisms of object recognition[J]. Science, 1993,(262):685-688.
[9] Kobatake, E., & Tanaka, K. Neuronal selectivities to complex object features in the ventral visual pathway of the macaque cerebral cortex[J]. Journal of Neuroscience, 1994,71(3):856-867.
[10] Esteky, H., & Tanaka, K. Effects of changes in aspect ratio of stimulus shape on responses of cells in the monkey inferotemporal cortex[C]. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts. 1998,24: 899.
[11] Tanaka, K. Inferotemporal cortex and object vision[J]. Annual Review of Neuroscience,Science, 1996,19:109-139.
[12] Biederman, I., & Gerhardstein, P. C. Recognizing depth-rotated objects:evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1993,19(6): 1162-1182.
[13] Tarr, M. J. Rotating objects to recognition them: a case study of the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects[J].Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1995,2(1): 55-82.
[14] Bulthoff, H. H., & Edelman, S. Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 1992, 89: 60-64.
[15] Perrett, D. I., Oram, M. W., & Ashbridge, E. Evidence accumulation in cell popul ations responsive to faces: an account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations[J]. Cognition, 1998,67(1,2): 111-145.
[16] Riesenhuber, M., & Poggio, T. Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex [J]. Nature Neuroscience,1999,2:1019-1025.
[17] Edelman, S., & Intrator, N. Towards structural systematicity in distributed, statically bound visual representations[J]. Cognitive Science, 2003,27:73-109.
[18] Edelman, S.,& Intrator, N. (Coarse coding of shape fragments) + (retinotopy):a representation of structure[J]. Spatial Vision, 2000,13:255-264.
[19] Hayward, W. G, & Tarr, M. J. Testing conditions for viewpoint invariance in object recognition[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1997,23(5): 1511-1521.
[20] Baker, C. C, & Kosslyn, M. The role of parts and spatial relations in object identification[J].Perception.l993,22:229-248.
[21] Oram, M. W., & Perrett, D. I. Modelling visual recognition from neurobiological constraints[J].Neural Networks, 1994,7:945-972.
[22] Humphreys, G. W., & Kahn, S. C. Recognizing novel views of three-dimensional objects[J]. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1992,46:170-190.
[23] Edelman, S., & Bulthoff, H. H. Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects[J]. Vision Research, 1992,32:2385-2400.
[24] Vetter, T., Poggio, T., & Bulthoff, H. H. The importance of symmetry and virtual views in three dimensional object recognition[J]. Current Biology .1994,4:18-23.
[25] Edelman, S. Class similarity and viewpoint invariance in the recognition of 3D objects[J].Biological Cybernetics,1995,72:207-220.
[26]Murray,J.E.,Jolicoeur,P.,McMullen,P.A.,& Ingleton,M.Orientation-invariant transfer of training in the identification of rotated natural objects[J].Memory and Cognition,1993,21(5),604-610.
[27]Tarr,M.J.,& Pinker,S.Orientation-dependent mechanisms in shape-recognition -further issues[J].Psychological Science,1991,(2):207-209.
[28]Moses,Y.,Ullman,S.,& Edelman,S.Generalization to novel images in upright and inverted faces[J].Perception,1996,25:443-462.
[29]Biederman,I.,& Bar,M.One-shot viewpoint invariance in matching novel objects [J].Vision Research.1999,39:2885-2899.
[30]Tarr,M.J.,Williams,P.,Hayward,W.G.,& Gauthier,I.Three-dimensional object recognition is viewpoint dependent[J].Nature Neuroscience,1998,1:275-277.
[31]Biederman,I.,& Cooper,E.E.Size invariance in visual object priming[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance.1992,18:121-133.
[32]Tarr,M.J.,B(u|¨)lthoff,H.H.,Zabinski,M.,& Blanz,V.To what extent do unique parts influence recognition across viewpoint?[J]Psychological Science,1997,8:282-289
[33]Logothetis,N.K.,Pauls,J.,B(u|¨)lthoff,H.H.,& Poggio,T.View-dependent object recognition by monkeys[J].Current Biology.1994,4:401-414.
[34]Hill,H.,Schyns,P.G.,& Akamatsu,S.Information and viewpoint dependence in face recognition[J].Cognition,1997,62:201-222.
[35]Vetter,T.,Hurlbert,A.,& Poggio,T.View-based models of 3D object recognition:invariance to imaging transformations[J].Cerebral Cortex,1995,5:261-269.
[36]Troje,N.,& B(u|¨)lthoff,H.H.Face recognition under varying poses:the role of texture and shape[J].Vision Research.1996,36(12):1761-1771.
[37]Vetter,T.,& Poggio,T.Symmetric 3D objects are an easy case for 2D object recognition[J].Spatial Vision,1994,8:443-453.
[38]Perrett,D.I.,Oram,M.W.,Harries,M.H.,Bevan,R.,Hietanen,J.K.,Benson,P.J.,& Thomas,S.Viewer-centred and object-centred coding of heads in the macaque temporal cortex[J].Experimental Brain Research,1991,86:159-173.
[39]Kosslyn,S.M.,Chahris,C.F.,& Marsolek,C.M.Categorical versus coordinate spatial representation:computational analyses and computer simulations[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,1992,18(3):562-577.
[40] Cook, N. D., Fruh, H., & Landis, T. The cerebral hemispheres and neural network simulations:design consideration[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1995,21 (2): 410-422.
[41] Baker, D. P., Chabris, C. F., & Kosslyn, S. M. Encoding categorical and coordinate spatial relations without input-output correlations:new simulation models[J]. Cognitive Science,1999,23 (1) :33-51.
[42] Iachini, T., & Giusberti, F. Metric properties of spatial image generated from locomotion: the effect of absolute size on mental scanning[J]. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2004,16 (4):573-596.
[43] Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. The child's concept of space[J].Great Britain International Ltd, 1997,481-485.
[44] Klatzky, R. L. Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations:definitions,distinctions and interconnections.an interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial knowledge[J]. Spatial Cognition, 1998,1 -18.
[45] Wurm, L. Color improves objectrecognition in normal and low vision[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,1993,19:899-911.
[46] Tanaka, J., Weiskopf, D., & Williams, P. The role of color in high-level vision[J].Trends in Cognitive Sciences.2001,(5):211-215.
[47] Hummel, J. E., & Stankiewicz, B. J. Categorical relations in shape perception[J].Spatial Vision. 1996,10: 201-236.
[48] Diwadkar, V. A., & McNamara, T. P. Viewpoint dependence in scene recognition. Psychological Science[J].1997,8:302-307.
[49] Hummel, J. E. Reference frames and relations in computational models of object recognition[J].Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1994,3:111-116.
[50] Tarr, M. J., & Bulthoff, H. H. Is human object recognition better described by geon-structural-descriptions or by multipleviews?comment on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993)[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1995, 21(6):1494-1505.
[51] Biederman, I., & Bar, M. One-shot viewpoint invariance in matching novel objects[J].VisionResearch,1999,39:2885-2899.
[52] Gauthier, I., Hayward, W. G., & Tarr, M. J. BOLD activity during mental rotation and viewpoint-dependent object recognition[J]. Neuron, 2002,34:161-171.
[53] Wilson, K. D., & Farah, M. J. Distinct patterns of viewpoint-dependent BOLD activity during common-object recognition and mental rotation[J]. Perception,2006,35(10): 1351-1366.
[54] Ganis, G, Schendan, H. E., & Kosslyn, S. M. Neuroimaging evidence for object model verification theory: role of prefrontal control in visual object categorization [J]. Neurolmage, 2007,34:384-398.
[55] Altmann, C. F., Grodd, W., Kourtzi Z, B(?)lthoff, H. H., &Karnath, H. O. Similar cortical correlates underlie visual object identification and orientation judgment [J].Neuropsychologia,2005,43:2101-2108.
[56] Bar, M, & Biederman, I. Subliminal visual priming[J]. Psychological Science,1998,9(6):464-469.
[57] Gauthier, I., & Tarr, M. J.Orientation priming of novel shapes in the context of viewpoint-dependent recognition[J]. Perception, 1997, 26:51-73.
[58] Beymer, D., & Poggio, T. Image representations for visual learning[J].Science,1996,272:1905-1909.
[59] Edelman, S. Representation, similarity, and the chorus of prototypes[J]. Minds and Machines,1995,5(1):45-68.
[60] Lando, M., & Edelman, S. Receptive field spaces and class based generalization from a single view in face recognition[J]. Network,1995,6:551-576.
[61] Busey, T. A., & Zaki, S. R.The contribution of symmetry and motion to the recognition of faces at novel orientations[J].Memory and Cognition,2004,(32):916-931.
[62] Kourtzi, Z., & Shiffrar, M. Visual representation of malleable and rigid objects that deform as they rotate[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2001,(27): 335-355.
[63] Vuong, Q. C, & Tarr, M. Rotation direction affects object recognition[J].Vision Research, 2004,( 44):1717-1730.
[64] Schendan, H. E., & Stern, C. E. Mental rotation and object categorization share a common network of prefrontal and dorsal and ventral regions of posterior cortex[J]. Neurolmage, 2007,(35): 1264-1277.
[65] Lawson, R., & Jolicoeur, P. Recognition thresholds for plane rotated pictures of familiar objects[J]. Acta Psychologica, 2003,112:17-41.
[66] Willems, B., & Wagemans, J. Matching multicomponent objects from different viewpoints:mental rotation as normalization?[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,2001,27:1090-1115.
[67]Hayward,W.G,Zhou,G.M.,Gauthier,I.,& Harris,I.M.Dissociating viewpoint cost in mental rotation and object recognition[J].Psychonomic Bulletin and Review,2006,13(5):820-825.
[68]Harris,I.M.,Harris,J.A.,& Caine,D.Mental rotation deficits following damage to the right basal ganglia[J].Neuropsychology,2002,16:524-537.
[69]Stankiewicz,B.J.Empirical evidence for independent dimensions in the visual representation of three-dimensional shape[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,2002,28:913-932.
[70]Foster,D.H.,& Gilson,S.J.Recognizing novel three-dimensional objects by summing signals from parts and views[J].Proceedings of the Royal Society of London,2002,269:1939-1947.
[71]Newell,F.N.,Sheppard,D.M.,& Edelman,S.The interaction of shape and location-based priming in object categorization:evidence for a hybrid "what +where"representation stage[J].Vision Research,2005,45:2065-2080.
[72]Vuilleumier,P.,Henson,R.N.,& Driver,J.Multiple levels of visual object constancy revealed by event-related fMRI of repetition priming[J].Nature Neuroscience,2002,5(5):491-499.
[73]Schyns,P.G.Diagnostic recognition:task constraints,object formation and their interactions[J].Cognition,1998,67:147-179.
[74]Tarr,M.J.,& Pinker,S.When does human object recognition use a viewer-centered reference frame?[J].Psychological Science 1,1990,(42):253-256.
[75]Guthier,I.,Anderson,A.W.,Tarr,M.J.,Skudlarski,P.,& Gore,J.C.Levels of categorization in visual objects.studied with fMRI[J].Current Biology,1997,7:645-651.
[76]Jolicoeur,P.Identification of disoriented objects:a dual-systems theory[J].Mind and Language,1990,5(4):387-410.
[77]Gauthier,I.,& Tarr,M.J.Becoming a 'greeble' expert:exploring the face recognition mechanism[J].Vision Research,1997,37(12):1673-1682.
[78]Tanaka,J.W.,& Sengco,J.A.Features and their configuration in face recognition[J].Memory and Cognition,1997,25(5):583-592.
[2] Hummel, J. E. Where view-based theories break down: the role of structure in shape perception and object recognition. cognitive dynamics:conceptual change in humans and machines[M]. Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum: 2000,157- 185.
[3] Hummel, J. E., & Biederman, I. Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition[J]. Psychological Review, 1992,99(3):480-517.
[4] Biederman, I., & Gerhardstein, P. C. Viewpoint-dependent mechanisms in visual object recognition:reply to Tarr and B(?)lthoff[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1995,21:1506-1514.
[5] Biederman, I., & Gerhardstein, P. C. Recognizing depth-rotated objects: evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1993,19(6): 1162-1182.
[6] Biederman, I. Recognizing depth-rotated objects:a review of recent research and heory[J]. Spatial Vision,2001,13:241-253.
[7] Hummel, J. E. Complementary solutions to the binding problem in vision: implications for shape perception and object recognition[J]. Visual Cognition,2001,(8):489-517.
[8] Tanaka, K. Neuronal mechanisms of object recognition[J]. Science, 1993,(262):685-688.
[9] Kobatake, E., & Tanaka, K. Neuronal selectivities to complex object features in the ventral visual pathway of the macaque cerebral cortex[J]. Journal of Neuroscience, 1994,71(3):856-867.
[10] Esteky, H., & Tanaka, K. Effects of changes in aspect ratio of stimulus shape on responses of cells in the monkey inferotemporal cortex[C]. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts. 1998,24: 899.
[11] Tanaka, K. Inferotemporal cortex and object vision[J]. Annual Review of Neuroscience,Science, 1996,19:109-139.
[12] Biederman, I., & Gerhardstein, P. C. Recognizing depth-rotated objects:evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1993,19(6): 1162-1182.
[13] Tarr, M. J. Rotating objects to recognition them: a case study of the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects[J].Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1995,2(1): 55-82.
[14] Bulthoff, H. H., & Edelman, S. Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 1992, 89: 60-64.
[15] Perrett, D. I., Oram, M. W., & Ashbridge, E. Evidence accumulation in cell popul ations responsive to faces: an account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations[J]. Cognition, 1998,67(1,2): 111-145.
[16] Riesenhuber, M., & Poggio, T. Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex [J]. Nature Neuroscience,1999,2:1019-1025.
[17] Edelman, S., & Intrator, N. Towards structural systematicity in distributed, statically bound visual representations[J]. Cognitive Science, 2003,27:73-109.
[18] Edelman, S.,& Intrator, N. (Coarse coding of shape fragments) + (retinotopy):a representation of structure[J]. Spatial Vision, 2000,13:255-264.
[19] Hayward, W. G, & Tarr, M. J. Testing conditions for viewpoint invariance in object recognition[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1997,23(5): 1511-1521.
[20] Baker, C. C, & Kosslyn, M. The role of parts and spatial relations in object identification[J].Perception.l993,22:229-248.
[21] Oram, M. W., & Perrett, D. I. Modelling visual recognition from neurobiological constraints[J].Neural Networks, 1994,7:945-972.
[22] Humphreys, G. W., & Kahn, S. C. Recognizing novel views of three-dimensional objects[J]. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1992,46:170-190.
[23] Edelman, S., & Bulthoff, H. H. Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects[J]. Vision Research, 1992,32:2385-2400.
[24] Vetter, T., Poggio, T., & Bulthoff, H. H. The importance of symmetry and virtual views in three dimensional object recognition[J]. Current Biology .1994,4:18-23.
[25] Edelman, S. Class similarity and viewpoint invariance in the recognition of 3D objects[J].Biological Cybernetics,1995,72:207-220.
[26]Murray,J.E.,Jolicoeur,P.,McMullen,P.A.,& Ingleton,M.Orientation-invariant transfer of training in the identification of rotated natural objects[J].Memory and Cognition,1993,21(5),604-610.
[27]Tarr,M.J.,& Pinker,S.Orientation-dependent mechanisms in shape-recognition -further issues[J].Psychological Science,1991,(2):207-209.
[28]Moses,Y.,Ullman,S.,& Edelman,S.Generalization to novel images in upright and inverted faces[J].Perception,1996,25:443-462.
[29]Biederman,I.,& Bar,M.One-shot viewpoint invariance in matching novel objects [J].Vision Research.1999,39:2885-2899.
[30]Tarr,M.J.,Williams,P.,Hayward,W.G.,& Gauthier,I.Three-dimensional object recognition is viewpoint dependent[J].Nature Neuroscience,1998,1:275-277.
[31]Biederman,I.,& Cooper,E.E.Size invariance in visual object priming[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance.1992,18:121-133.
[32]Tarr,M.J.,B(u|¨)lthoff,H.H.,Zabinski,M.,& Blanz,V.To what extent do unique parts influence recognition across viewpoint?[J]Psychological Science,1997,8:282-289
[33]Logothetis,N.K.,Pauls,J.,B(u|¨)lthoff,H.H.,& Poggio,T.View-dependent object recognition by monkeys[J].Current Biology.1994,4:401-414.
[34]Hill,H.,Schyns,P.G.,& Akamatsu,S.Information and viewpoint dependence in face recognition[J].Cognition,1997,62:201-222.
[35]Vetter,T.,Hurlbert,A.,& Poggio,T.View-based models of 3D object recognition:invariance to imaging transformations[J].Cerebral Cortex,1995,5:261-269.
[36]Troje,N.,& B(u|¨)lthoff,H.H.Face recognition under varying poses:the role of texture and shape[J].Vision Research.1996,36(12):1761-1771.
[37]Vetter,T.,& Poggio,T.Symmetric 3D objects are an easy case for 2D object recognition[J].Spatial Vision,1994,8:443-453.
[38]Perrett,D.I.,Oram,M.W.,Harries,M.H.,Bevan,R.,Hietanen,J.K.,Benson,P.J.,& Thomas,S.Viewer-centred and object-centred coding of heads in the macaque temporal cortex[J].Experimental Brain Research,1991,86:159-173.
[39]Kosslyn,S.M.,Chahris,C.F.,& Marsolek,C.M.Categorical versus coordinate spatial representation:computational analyses and computer simulations[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,1992,18(3):562-577.
[40] Cook, N. D., Fruh, H., & Landis, T. The cerebral hemispheres and neural network simulations:design consideration[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1995,21 (2): 410-422.
[41] Baker, D. P., Chabris, C. F., & Kosslyn, S. M. Encoding categorical and coordinate spatial relations without input-output correlations:new simulation models[J]. Cognitive Science,1999,23 (1) :33-51.
[42] Iachini, T., & Giusberti, F. Metric properties of spatial image generated from locomotion: the effect of absolute size on mental scanning[J]. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2004,16 (4):573-596.
[43] Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. The child's concept of space[J].Great Britain International Ltd, 1997,481-485.
[44] Klatzky, R. L. Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations:definitions,distinctions and interconnections.an interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial knowledge[J]. Spatial Cognition, 1998,1 -18.
[45] Wurm, L. Color improves objectrecognition in normal and low vision[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,1993,19:899-911.
[46] Tanaka, J., Weiskopf, D., & Williams, P. The role of color in high-level vision[J].Trends in Cognitive Sciences.2001,(5):211-215.
[47] Hummel, J. E., & Stankiewicz, B. J. Categorical relations in shape perception[J].Spatial Vision. 1996,10: 201-236.
[48] Diwadkar, V. A., & McNamara, T. P. Viewpoint dependence in scene recognition. Psychological Science[J].1997,8:302-307.
[49] Hummel, J. E. Reference frames and relations in computational models of object recognition[J].Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1994,3:111-116.
[50] Tarr, M. J., & Bulthoff, H. H. Is human object recognition better described by geon-structural-descriptions or by multipleviews?comment on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993)[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1995, 21(6):1494-1505.
[51] Biederman, I., & Bar, M. One-shot viewpoint invariance in matching novel objects[J].VisionResearch,1999,39:2885-2899.
[52] Gauthier, I., Hayward, W. G., & Tarr, M. J. BOLD activity during mental rotation and viewpoint-dependent object recognition[J]. Neuron, 2002,34:161-171.
[53] Wilson, K. D., & Farah, M. J. Distinct patterns of viewpoint-dependent BOLD activity during common-object recognition and mental rotation[J]. Perception,2006,35(10): 1351-1366.
[54] Ganis, G, Schendan, H. E., & Kosslyn, S. M. Neuroimaging evidence for object model verification theory: role of prefrontal control in visual object categorization [J]. Neurolmage, 2007,34:384-398.
[55] Altmann, C. F., Grodd, W., Kourtzi Z, B(?)lthoff, H. H., &Karnath, H. O. Similar cortical correlates underlie visual object identification and orientation judgment [J].Neuropsychologia,2005,43:2101-2108.
[56] Bar, M, & Biederman, I. Subliminal visual priming[J]. Psychological Science,1998,9(6):464-469.
[57] Gauthier, I., & Tarr, M. J.Orientation priming of novel shapes in the context of viewpoint-dependent recognition[J]. Perception, 1997, 26:51-73.
[58] Beymer, D., & Poggio, T. Image representations for visual learning[J].Science,1996,272:1905-1909.
[59] Edelman, S. Representation, similarity, and the chorus of prototypes[J]. Minds and Machines,1995,5(1):45-68.
[60] Lando, M., & Edelman, S. Receptive field spaces and class based generalization from a single view in face recognition[J]. Network,1995,6:551-576.
[61] Busey, T. A., & Zaki, S. R.The contribution of symmetry and motion to the recognition of faces at novel orientations[J].Memory and Cognition,2004,(32):916-931.
[62] Kourtzi, Z., & Shiffrar, M. Visual representation of malleable and rigid objects that deform as they rotate[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2001,(27): 335-355.
[63] Vuong, Q. C, & Tarr, M. Rotation direction affects object recognition[J].Vision Research, 2004,( 44):1717-1730.
[64] Schendan, H. E., & Stern, C. E. Mental rotation and object categorization share a common network of prefrontal and dorsal and ventral regions of posterior cortex[J]. Neurolmage, 2007,(35): 1264-1277.
[65] Lawson, R., & Jolicoeur, P. Recognition thresholds for plane rotated pictures of familiar objects[J]. Acta Psychologica, 2003,112:17-41.
[66] Willems, B., & Wagemans, J. Matching multicomponent objects from different viewpoints:mental rotation as normalization?[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,2001,27:1090-1115.
[67]Hayward,W.G,Zhou,G.M.,Gauthier,I.,& Harris,I.M.Dissociating viewpoint cost in mental rotation and object recognition[J].Psychonomic Bulletin and Review,2006,13(5):820-825.
[68]Harris,I.M.,Harris,J.A.,& Caine,D.Mental rotation deficits following damage to the right basal ganglia[J].Neuropsychology,2002,16:524-537.
[69]Stankiewicz,B.J.Empirical evidence for independent dimensions in the visual representation of three-dimensional shape[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,2002,28:913-932.
[70]Foster,D.H.,& Gilson,S.J.Recognizing novel three-dimensional objects by summing signals from parts and views[J].Proceedings of the Royal Society of London,2002,269:1939-1947.
[71]Newell,F.N.,Sheppard,D.M.,& Edelman,S.The interaction of shape and location-based priming in object categorization:evidence for a hybrid "what +where"representation stage[J].Vision Research,2005,45:2065-2080.
[72]Vuilleumier,P.,Henson,R.N.,& Driver,J.Multiple levels of visual object constancy revealed by event-related fMRI of repetition priming[J].Nature Neuroscience,2002,5(5):491-499.
[73]Schyns,P.G.Diagnostic recognition:task constraints,object formation and their interactions[J].Cognition,1998,67:147-179.
[74]Tarr,M.J.,& Pinker,S.When does human object recognition use a viewer-centered reference frame?[J].Psychological Science 1,1990,(42):253-256.
[75]Guthier,I.,Anderson,A.W.,Tarr,M.J.,Skudlarski,P.,& Gore,J.C.Levels of categorization in visual objects.studied with fMRI[J].Current Biology,1997,7:645-651.
[76]Jolicoeur,P.Identification of disoriented objects:a dual-systems theory[J].Mind and Language,1990,5(4):387-410.
[77]Gauthier,I.,& Tarr,M.J.Becoming a 'greeble' expert:exploring the face recognition mechanism[J].Vision Research,1997,37(12):1673-1682.
[78]Tanaka,J.W.,& Sengco,J.A.Features and their configuration in face recognition[J].Memory and Cognition,1997,25(5):583-592.