Pre-classification for automatic image orientation

In this paper, we propose a novel method for automatic orientation of digital images. The approach is based on exploiting the properties of local statistics of natural scenes. In this way, we address some of the difficulties encountered in previous works in this area. The main contribution of this paper is to introduce a pre-classification step into carefully defined categories in order to simplify subsequent orientation detection. The proposed algorithm was tested on 9068 images and compared to existing state of the art in the area. Results show a significant improvement over previous work

Why my photos look sideways or upside down? Detecting Canonical Orientation of Images using Convolutional Neural Networks

Image orientation detection requires high-level scene understanding. Humans use object recognition and contextual scene information to correctly orient images. In literature, the problem of image orientation detection is mostly confronted by using low-level vision features, while some approaches incorporate few easily detectable semantic cues to gain minor improvements. The vast amount of semantic content in images makes orientation detection challenging, and therefore there is a large semantic gap between existing methods and human behavior. Also, existing methods in literature report highly discrepant detection rates, which is mainly due to large differences in datasets and limited variety of test images used for evaluation. In this work, for the first time, we leverage the power of deep learning and adapt pre-trained convolutional neural networks using largest training dataset to-date for the image orientation detection task. An extensive evaluation of our model on different public datasets shows that it remarkably generalizes to correctly orient a large set of unconstrained images; it also significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art and achieves accuracy very close to that of humans

Why my photos look sideways or upside down? Detecting Canonical Orientation of Images using Convolutional Neural Networks

Image orientation detection requires high-level scene understanding. Humans use object recognition and contextual scene information to correctly orient images. In literature, the problem of image orientation detection is mostly confronted by using low-level vision features, while some approaches incorporate few easily detectable semantic cues to gain minor improvements. The vast amount of semantic content in images makes orientation detection challenging, and therefore there is a large semantic gap between existing methods and human behavior. Also, existing methods in literature report highly discrepant detection rates, which is mainly due to large differences in datasets and limited variety of test images used for evaluation. In this work, for the first time, we leverage the power of deep learning and adapt pre-trained convolutional neural networks using largest training dataset to-date for the image orientation detection task. An extensive evaluation of our model on different public datasets shows that it remarkably generalizes to correctly orient a large set of unconstrained images; it also significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art and achieves accuracy very close to that of humans

Change blindness: eradication of gestalt strategies

Arrays of eight, texture-defined rectangles were used as stimuli in a one-shot change blindness (CB) task where there was a 50% chance that one rectangle would change orientation between two successive presentations separated by an interval. CB was eliminated by cueing the target rectangle in the first stimulus, reduced by cueing in the interval and unaffected by cueing in the second presentation. This supports the idea that a representation was formed that persisted through the interval before being 'overwritten' by the second presentation (Landman et al, 2003 Vision Research 43149–164]. Another possibility is that participants used some kind of grouping or Gestalt strategy. To test this we changed the spatial position of the rectangles in the second presentation by shifting them along imaginary spokes (by ±1 degree) emanating from the central fixation point. There was no significant difference seen in performance between this and the standard task [F(1,4)=2.565, p=0.185]. This may suggest two things: (i) Gestalt grouping is not used as a strategy in these tasks, and (ii) it gives further weight to the argument that objects may be stored and retrieved from a pre-attentional store during this task

The role of terminators and occlusion cues in motion integration and segmentation: a neural network model

The perceptual interaction of terminators and occlusion cues with the functional processes of motion integration and segmentation is examined using a computational model. Inte-gration is necessary to overcome noise and the inherent ambiguity in locally measured motion direction (the aperture problem). Segmentation is required to detect the presence of motion discontinuities and to prevent spurious integration of motion signals between objects with different trajectories. Terminators are used for motion disambiguation, while occlusion cues are used to suppress motion noise at points where objects intersect. The model illustrates how competitive and cooperative interactions among cells carrying out these functions can account for a number of perceptual effects, including the chopsticks illusion and the occluded diamond illusion. Possible links to the neurophysiology of the middle temporal visual area (MT) are suggested

Interactions between motion and form processing in the human visual system

The predominant view of motion and form processing in the human visual system assumes that these two attributes are handled by separate and independent modules. Motion processing involves filtering by direction-selective sensors, followed by integration to solve the aperture problem. Form processing involves filtering by orientation-selective and size-selective receptive fields, followed by integration to encode object shape. It has long been known that motion signals can influence form processing in the well-known Gestalt principle of common fate; texture elements which share a common motion property are grouped into a single contour or texture region. However, recent research in psychophysics and neuroscience indicates that the influence of form signals on motion processing is more extensive than previously thought. First, the salience and apparent direction of moving lines depends on how the local orientation and direction of motion combine to match the receptive field properties of motion-selective neurons. Second, orientation signals generated by “motion-streaks” influence motion processing; motion sensitivity, apparent direction and adaptation are affected by simultaneously present orientation signals. Third, form signals generated by human body shape influence biological motion processing, as revealed by studies using point-light motion stimuli. Thus, form-motion integration seems to occur at several different levels of cortical processing, from V1 to STS

Perception of the Body in Space: Mechanisms

The principal topic is the perception of body orientation and motion in space and the extent to which these perceptual abstraction can be related directly to the knowledge of sensory mechanisms, particularly for the vestibular apparatus. Spatial orientation is firmly based on the underlying sensory mechanisms and their central integration. For some of the simplest situations, like rotation about a vertical axis in darkness, the dynamic response of the semicircular canals furnishes almost enough information to explain the sensations of turning and stopping. For more complex conditions involving multiple sensory systems and possible conflicts among their messages, a mechanistic response requires significant speculative assumptions. The models that exist for multisensory spatial orientation are still largely of the non-rational parameter variety. They are capable of predicting relationships among input motions and output perceptions of motion, but they involve computational functions that do not now and perhaps never will have their counterpart in central nervous system machinery. The challenge continues to be in the iterative process of testing models by experiment, correcting them where necessary, and testing them again