English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Reply to Lages and Heron: Binocular 3D motion estimation

Welchman, A., Lam, J., & Bülthoff, H. (2008). Reply to Lages and Heron: Binocular 3D motion estimation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(51), E118-E118. doi:10.1073/pnas.0810330105.

Item is

Basic

show hide
Item Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-C625-3 Version Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0003-2C56-C
Genre: Journal Article

Files

show Files

Locators

show
hide
Description:
-

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Welchman, AE, Author              
Lam, JM1, 2, Author              
Bülthoff, HH1, 2, Author              
Affiliations:
1Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_1497797              
2Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, Spemannstrasse 38, 72076 Tübingen, DE, ou_1497794              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: In examining 3D motion estimation (1), we start by considering the computation of two entirely plausible quantities—changes in disparity (δ) and azimuth (φ). Because these depend on the difference and mean of retinal signals, respectively, we expect φ to be more reliable. The impact of this differential reliability on motion estimation is best illustrated for pure motion in depth (Vz) and pure lateral motion (Vx). Vz depends only on the higher-variance δ signal, whereas Vx depends almost solely on φ for small movements. Thus we measure performance along these dimensions to illustrate the limitations imposed by the underlying computations. Lages and Heron (2) query whether it is biologically plausible for the brain to estimate Vx and Vz separately. As we have shown elsewhere (3), formulating the estimation problem in terms Vx and Vz does not imply that the brain estimates the components separately (although performance can clearly be measured along these dimensions as we have shown). Rather, trajectory angles could be calculated directly based on δ and φ (4). The Bayesian model we use (in ref. ,1, see figure 1C) selects the estimator from the two-dimensional (Vx, Vz) space rather than relying on independent estimation. Lages's previous work (5) suggested that a model based on static disparity (δ) provides the best account for 3D motion estimation. Although this is a formulation we have used previously (,3), we suggest that, within the context of judging moving objects, it is more plausible that estimation be based on motion rather than a disparity snapshot.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2008-12
 Publication Status: Published in print
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: -
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0810330105
BibTex Citekey: 6043
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
  Other : Proc. Acad. Sci. USA
  Other : Proc. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
  Other : Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA
  Abbreviation : PNAS
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: Washington, D.C. : National Academy of Sciences
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 105 (51) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: E118 - E118 Identifier: ISSN: 0027-8424
CoNE: https://pure.mpg.de/cone/journals/resource/954925427230