1. derive the object shape.
(identify central axis using 2 1/2
D sketch)
has 3 assumptions, must accept all
3 to correctly identify.
2. locate object axis and derive 3-D description
1.area of concavity. 2.divide area in
primitives. 3.find axis for each primitive.
4.link them to form 3-D
3. compare 3-D description to mental catalogue of objects
1. compare mental catalogue.
2. hierarchical levels. 3. once
match found process ends
evaluation
FOR
locating central axis critical to
recognition- supported by Lawson &
Humphreys (1996)
Warrington & Taylor (1978)
patients with right hemisphere
focal lesions- difficulty
recognising from different
viewpoints. eg. comparing
photos of same object from
different viewpoint.
unable to convert 2-D to 3-D. Features
needed to identify was obscured by different
angle (rotation)
Humphreys & Riddoch (1984) foreshortened
images/ hidden features. foreshortened
recognised less- suggesting major axis is
important to forming 3-D model
explains misinterpretation if contour
generator is misidentified
AGAINST
within-category discrimination
hard to explain- converting to
generalised cones leads to same
representations (cannot distinguish
differences)
Pattern matching theories ( uses
templates in memory) unlikely
though as could have too many
templates or large generic
template
Feature recognition
theories (key
features of image
extracted)
sturctural description
theories ( key features &
how they are organised
with each other)
compared to internal
representations until
match found
adapts to variety & ambiguity.
describe in computer & human
language. can recognise 3-D
versions of 2-D images
3-D recognition must be able to
occur independent of viewpoint.
viewer-centred description
change to object-centred
description
Beiderman's Theory
agrees with Marr & Nishihara's theory
Enter text here
complex objects represented
as hierarchies of similar shapes