|Appears in Collections:||Psychology Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Evidence for relative disparity matching in the perception of an ambiguous stereogram|
|Publisher:||Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO)|
|Citation:||Goutcher R & Hibbard P (2010) Evidence for relative disparity matching in the perception of an ambiguous stereogram, Journal of Vision, 10 (12).|
|Abstract:||To compute depth from binocular disparity, the visual system must correctly link corresponding points between two images, given multiple possible correspondences. Typically, model solutions to this problem use some form of local spatial smoothing, with many physiologically inspired models doing so implicitly, through the use of local cross-correlation-like procedures. In this paper we show that implicit smoothing, without the explicit consideration of relative disparity, cannot account for biases in the perception of a novel ambiguous stereo stimulus. Observers viewed a stereogram consisting of multiple strips of periodic random-dot patterns, perceived as either a slanted surface, or a triangular wedge in depth, and reported their perception in a 4AFC task. Biases in the perception of this stimulus are shown to depend upon the stimulus configuration in its entirety, and cannot be accounted for by low-level preferences for disparity sign. Such results are not consistent with local smoothing effects arising solely at the level of cross-correlation-like absolute disparity detectors. Instead, our results suggest the presence of smoothing constraints that consider the differences in disparity between neighboring image regions. These results further suggest that such smoothing generally biases matching toward solutions that minimize relative disparity, regardless of the presence of changes in disparity sign.|
|Rights:||The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
University of St Andrews
|Goutcher and Hibbard 2010.pdf||1.37 MB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 31/12/2999 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependant on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.