Visual Perception Cecilia R. Aragon I247 UC Berkeley Spring 2010.
-
Upload
joelle-benham -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
2
Transcript of Visual Perception Cecilia R. Aragon I247 UC Berkeley Spring 2010.
Visual Perception
Cecilia R. AragonI247
UC BerkeleySpring 2010
I 247 2
Acknowledgments
• Thanks to slides and publications by Marti Hearst, Pat Hanrahan, Christopher Healey, Maneesh Agrawala, and Lawrence Anderson-Huang, Colin Ware, Daniel Carr.
Spring 2010
I 247 3
Visual perception
• Thinking with our Eyes• Structure of the Retina• Preattentive Processing • Detection • Estimating Magnitude• Change Blindness• Multiple Attributes• GestaltSpring 2010
I 247 4
Thinking with our Eyes
• 70% of body’s sense receptors reside in our eyes• Metaphors to describe understanding often refer to
vision (“I see,” “insight,” “illumination”)• “The eye and the visual cortex of the brain form a
massively parallel processor that provides the highest-bandwidth channel into human cognitive centers.” – Colin Ware, Information Visualization, 2004
• Important to understand how visual perception works in order to effectively design visualizations
Spring 2010
I 247 5
Thinking with our Eyes
• Working memory is extremely limited• How to overcome?• “The processing of grouping simple concepts
into more complex ones is called chunking.” – Ware, 2004
• “The process of becoming an expert is largely one of learning to create effective chunks.” – Ware, 2004
Spring 2010
I 247 6
The Power of Visualization
• “It is possible to have a far more complex concept structure represented externally in a visual display than can be held in visual and verbal working memories.” – Ware, 2004
Spring 2010
I 247 7
How the Eye Works
The eye is not a camera!Attention is selective (filtering)Cognitive processesPsychophysics: concerned with establishing
quantitative relations between physical stimulation and perceptual events.
Spring 2010
I 247 8
How to Use Perceptual Properties• Information visualization should cause what is meaningful to
stand out
Spring 2010
I 247 9
The Optimal Display
• Typical monitor: 35 pixels/cm• = 40 cycles per degree at normal viewing
distances• Human eye: receptors packed into fovea at
180 per degree of visual angle• So a 4000x4000-pixel resolution monitor
should be adequate for most visual perception tasks
Spring 2010
I 247 10
Optimal spatial resolution
• Humans can resolve a grating of 50 cycles per degree (~44 pixels per cm)
• Sampling theory (Nyquist) states: need to sample at twice the highest frequency needed to detect
• So… why is 150 pixels per degree not sufficient (cf. laser printers at 460 dots per cm)?
• 3 reasons: aliasing, gray levels, superacuities• (will be discussed in future lecture)Spring 2010
I 247 11
Structure of the Retina
Spring 2010
I 247 12
Structure of the Retina
• The retina is not a camera!• Network of photo-receptor
cells (rods and cones) andtheir connections
Spring 2010
[Anderson-Huang, L. http://www.physics.utoledo.edu/~lsa/
_color/18_retina.htm]
I 247 13
Photo-transduction
• When a photon enters a receptor cell (e.g. a rod or cone), it is absorbed by a molecule called 11-cis-retinal andconverted to trans form.
• The different shapecauses it to ultimatelyreduce the electricalconductivity of thephoto-receptor cell.
Spring 2010
[Anderson-Huang, L. http://www.physics.utoledo.edu/~lsa/_color/18_retina.htm]
I 247 14
Retina• Photoreceptors:
– 120 million rods, more sensitive than cones, not sensitive to color
– 6-7 million cones, color sensitivity, concentrated in macula (central 12 degrees of visual field)
– Fovea centralis - 2 degrees of visual field – twice the width of thumbnail at arm’s length)
– Fovea comprises lessthan 1% of retinal sizebut 50% of visual cortex
Spring 2010
I 247 15
Electric currents from photo-receptors
• Photo-receptors generate an electrical current in the dark.
• Light shuts off the current.• Each doubling of light causes
roughly the same reduction of current (3 picoAmps for cones, 6 for rods).
• Rods more sensitive, recover more slowly.
• Cones recover faster, overshoot.• Geometrical response in scaling
laws of perception.
Spring 2010
[Anderson-Huang, L. http://www.physics.utoledo.edu/~lsa/_color/18_retina.htm]
Preattentive Processing
I 247 17
How many 5’s?
385720939823728196837293827382912358383492730122894839909020102032893759273091428938309762965817431869241024
Spring 2010
[Slide adapted from Joanna McGrenere http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~joanna/ ]
I 247 18
How many 5’s?
385720939823728196837293827382912358383492730122894839909020102032893759273091428938309762965817431869241024
Spring 2010
I 247 19
Preattentive Processing
• Certain basic visual properties are detected immediately by low-level visual system
• “Pop-out” vs. serial search• Tasks that can be performed in less than 200
to 250 milliseconds on a complex display• Eye movements take at least 200 msec to
initiate
Spring 2010
I 247 20
Color (hue) is preattentive
• Detection of red circle in group of blue circles is preattentive
Spring 2010
[image from Healey 2005]
I 247 21
Form (curvature) is preattentive
• Curved form “pops out” of display
Spring 2010
[image from Healey 2005]
I 247 22
Conjunction of attributes
• Conjunction target generally cannot be detected preattentively (red circle in sea of red square and blue circle distractors)
Spring 2010
[image from Healey 2005]
I 247 23
Healeyon preattentive processing
http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/PP/index.html
Spring 2010
I 247 24
Preattentive Visual Features
Spring 2010
line orientationlengthwidthsizecurvaturenumberterminatorsintersection
closurecolor (hue)intensityflickerdirection of motionstereoscopic depth3D depth cues
I 247 25
Cockpit dials
• Detection of a slanted line in a sea of vertical lines is preattentive
Spring 2010
I 247 26
Detection
Spring 2010
I 247 27
Just-Noticeable Difference
• Which is brighter?
Spring 2010
I 247 28
Just-Noticeable Difference
• Which is brighter?
Spring 2010
(130, 130, 130) (140, 140, 140)
I 247 29
Weber’s Law• In the 1830’s, Weber made measurements of the
just-noticeable differences (JNDs) in the perception of weight and other sensations.
• He found that for a range of stimuli, the ratio of the JND ΔS to the initial stimulus S was relatively constant:
ΔS / S = k
Spring 2010
I 247 30
Weber’s Law
• Ratios more important than magnitude in stimulus detection
• For example: we detect the presence of a change from 100 cm to 101 cm with the same probability as we detect the presence of a change from 1 to 1.01 cm, even though the discrepancy is 1 cm in the first case and only .01 cm in the second.
Spring 2010
I 247 31
Weber’s Law
• Most continuous variations in magnitude are perceived as discrete steps
• Examples: contour maps, font sizes
Spring 2010
I 247 32
Estimating Magnitude
Spring 2010
I 247 33
Stevens’ Power Law
• Compare area of circles:
Spring 2010
I 247 34
Stevens’ Power Law
s(x) = axb
s is the sensationx is the intensity of the
attributea is a multiplicative constantb is the power
b > 1: overestimateb < 1: underestimate
Spring 2010
[graph from Wilkinson 99]
I 247 35
Stevens’ Power LawSensation Exponent Brightness 0.33
Smell 0.55 (Coffee)
Loudness 0.6
Temperature 1.0 (Cold)
Taste 1.3 (Salt)
Heaviness 1.45
Electric Shock 3.5
Spring 2010
[Stevens 1961]
I 247 36
Stevens’ Power Law
Experimental results for b:
Length .9 to 1.1Area .6 to .9Volume .5 to .8
Heuristic: b ~ 1/sqrt(dimensionality)
Spring 2010
I 247 37
Stevens’ Power Law• Apparent magnitude scaling
Spring 2010
[Cartography: Thematic Map Design, p. 170, Dent, 96]
S = 0.98A0.87
[J. J. Flannery, The relative effectiveness of some graduated point symbols in the presentation of quantitative data, Canadian Geographer, 8(2), pp. 96-109, 1971] [slide from Pat Hanrahan]
I 247 38
Relative Magnitude Estimation
Most accurate
Least accurate
Position (common) scalePosition (non-aligned) scale
LengthSlopeAngle
AreaVolumeColor (hue/saturation/value)
Spring 2010
I 247 39
Change Blindness
Spring 2010
I 247 40
Change Blindness
• An interruption in what is being seen causes us to miss significant changes that occur in the scene during the interruption.
• Demo from Ron Rensink: http://www.psych.ubc.ca/~rensink/flicker/
Spring 2010
I 247 41
Possible Causes of Change Blindness
Spring 2010
[Simons, D. J. (2000), Current approaches to change blindness, Visual Cognition, 7, 1-16. ]
I 247 42
Multiple Visual Attributes
Spring 2010
I 247 43
The Game of Set• Color• Symbol• Number• Shading
A set is 3 cards such that each feature is EITHER the same on each card OR is different on each card.
Spring 2010
[Set applet by Adrien Treuille, http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/treuille/resc/set/]
I 247 44
Multiple Visual Attributes• Integral vs. separable
· Integral dimensions
· two or more attributes of an object are perceived holistically (e.g.width and height of rectangle).
· Separable dimensions
· judged separately, or through analytic processing (e.g. diameter and color of ball).
• Separable dimensions are orthogonal.• For example, position is highly separable from
color. In contrast, red and green hue perceptions tend to interfere with each other.
Spring 2010
I 247 45
Integral vs. Separable DimensionsIntegral
Separable
Spring 2010
[Ware 2000]
I 247 46
Gestalt
Spring 2010
I 247 47
Gestalt Principles• figure/ground• proximity• similarity• symmetry• connectedness• continuity• closure• common fate• transparencySpring 2010
I 247 48
Examples
Figure/Ground
Spring 2010
[http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Modules/MC10220/visper07.html]
ProximityConnectedness
[from Ware 2004]
I 247 49
Conclusion
· What is currently known about visual perception can aid the design process.
· Understanding low-level mechanisms of the visual processing system and using that knowledge can result in improved displays.
Spring 2010