Skeleton-based shape similarity.

IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Psychological review Pub Date : 2023-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-06 DOI:10.1037/rev0000412
Nathan Destler, Manish Singh, Jacob Feldman
{"title":"Skeleton-based shape similarity.","authors":"Nathan Destler, Manish Singh, Jacob Feldman","doi":"10.1037/rev0000412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many aspects of visual perception, including the classification of shapes into known categories and the induction of new shape categories from examples, are driven by <i>shape similarity.</i> But there is as yet no generally agreed, principled measure of the degree to which two shapes are \"similar.\" Here, we derive a measure of shape similarity based on the Bayesian skeleton estimation framework of Feldman and Singh (2006). The new measure, called <i>generative similarity,</i> is based on the idea that shapes should be considered similar in proportion to the posterior probability that they were generated from a common skeletal model rather than from distinct skeletal models. We report a series of experiments in which subjects were shown a small number (1, 2, or 3) of 2D or 3D \"nonsense\" shapes (generated randomly in a manner designed to avoid known shape categories) and asked to select other members of the \"same\" shape class from a larger set of (random) alternatives. We then modeled subjects' choices using a variety of shape similarity measures drawn from the literature, including our new measure, skeletal cross-likelihood, a skeleton-based measure recently proposed by Ayzenberg and Lourenco (2019), a nonskeletal part-based similarity model proposed by Erdogan and Jacobs (2017), and a convolutional neural network model (Vedaldi & Lenc, 2015). We found that our new similarity measure generally predicted subjects' selections better than these competing proposals. These results help explain how the human visual system evaluates shape similarity and open the door to a broader view of the induction of shape categories. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":"1653-1671"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000412","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Many aspects of visual perception, including the classification of shapes into known categories and the induction of new shape categories from examples, are driven by shape similarity. But there is as yet no generally agreed, principled measure of the degree to which two shapes are "similar." Here, we derive a measure of shape similarity based on the Bayesian skeleton estimation framework of Feldman and Singh (2006). The new measure, called generative similarity, is based on the idea that shapes should be considered similar in proportion to the posterior probability that they were generated from a common skeletal model rather than from distinct skeletal models. We report a series of experiments in which subjects were shown a small number (1, 2, or 3) of 2D or 3D "nonsense" shapes (generated randomly in a manner designed to avoid known shape categories) and asked to select other members of the "same" shape class from a larger set of (random) alternatives. We then modeled subjects' choices using a variety of shape similarity measures drawn from the literature, including our new measure, skeletal cross-likelihood, a skeleton-based measure recently proposed by Ayzenberg and Lourenco (2019), a nonskeletal part-based similarity model proposed by Erdogan and Jacobs (2017), and a convolutional neural network model (Vedaldi & Lenc, 2015). We found that our new similarity measure generally predicted subjects' selections better than these competing proposals. These results help explain how the human visual system evaluates shape similarity and open the door to a broader view of the induction of shape categories. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于骨架的形状相似性
视觉感知的许多方面,包括将形状归入已知类别以及从示例中归纳出新的形状类别,都是由形状相似性驱动的。但是,对于两个形状 "相似 "的程度,至今还没有一个公认的、原则性的测量方法。在此,我们基于费尔德曼和辛格(2006 年)的贝叶斯骨架估计框架,推导出一种形状相似度测量方法。这种新的测量方法被称为生成相似性,它所基于的理念是,形状的相似性应与它们由共同的骨骼模型而非不同的骨骼模型生成的后验概率成正比。我们报告了一系列实验,在这些实验中,我们向受试者展示了少量(1、2 或 3 个)二维或三维 "无意义 "形状(以避免已知形状类别的方式随机生成),并要求受试者从一组更大的(随机)备选形状中选择 "相同 "形状类别的其他成员。然后,我们使用文献中的各种形状相似性测量方法对受试者的选择进行建模,其中包括我们的新测量方法--骨骼交叉似然法、Ayzenberg 和 Lourenco(2019 年)最近提出的基于骨骼的测量方法、Erdogan 和 Jacobs(2017 年)提出的基于非骨骼部分的相似性模型以及卷积神经网络模型(Vedaldi & Lenc,2015 年)。我们发现,我们的新相似性测量方法对受试者选择的预测效果普遍优于这些竞争方案。这些结果有助于解释人类视觉系统是如何评估形状相似性的,并为更广泛地理解形状类别的归纳打开了大门。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological review
Psychological review 医学-心理学
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: Psychological Review publishes articles that make important theoretical contributions to any area of scientific psychology, including systematic evaluation of alternative theories.
期刊最新文献
How does depressive cognition develop? A state-dependent network model of predictive processing. A theory of flexible multimodal synchrony. Bouncing back from life's perturbations: Formalizing psychological resilience from a complex systems perspective. Bouncing back from life's perturbations: Formalizing psychological resilience from a complex systems perspective. The meaning of attention control.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1