Art Perception * David Cycleback
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Optical Illusion - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
Optical illusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Try Beta Log in / create account article discussion edit this page history [Hide] Wikipedia is there when you need it — now it needs you. $0.6M USD $7.5M USD Donate Now navigation Optical illusion Main page From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Contents Featured content This article is about visual perception. See Optical Illusion (album) for Current events information about the Time Requiem album. Random article An optical illusion (also called a visual illusion) is characterized by search visually perceived images that differ from objective reality. The information gathered by the eye is processed in the brain to give a percept that does not tally with a physical measurement of the stimulus source. There are three main types: literal optical illusions that create images that are interaction different from the objects that make them, physiological ones that are the An optical illusion. The square A About Wikipedia effects on the eyes and brain of excessive stimulation of a specific type is exactly the same shade of grey Community portal (brightness, tilt, color, movement), and cognitive illusions where the eye as square B. See Same color Recent changes and brain make unconscious inferences. illusion Contact Wikipedia Donate to Wikipedia Contents [hide] Help 1 Physiological illusions toolbox 2 Cognitive illusions 3 Explanation of cognitive illusions What links here 3.1 Perceptual organization Related changes 3.2 Depth and motion perception Upload file Special pages 3.3 Color and brightness -
Modeling and Rendering of Impossible Figures
Modeling and Rendering of Impossible Figures TAI-PANG WU The Chinese University of Hong Kong CHI-WING FU Nanyang Technological University SAI-KIT YEUNG The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology JIAYA JIA The Chinese University of Hong Kong and CHI-KEUNG TANG The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology 13 This article introduces an optimization approach for modeling and rendering impossible figures. Our solution is inspired by how modeling artists construct physical 3D models to produce a valid 2D view of an impossible figure. Given a set of 3D locally possible parts of the figure, our algorithm automatically optimizes a view-dependent 3D model, subject to the necessary 3D constraints for rendering the impossible figure at the desired novel viewpoint. A linear and constrained least-squares solution to the optimization problem is derived, thereby allowing an efficient computation and rendering new views of impossible figures at interactive rates. Once the optimized model is available, a variety of compelling rendering effects can be applied to the impossible figure. Categories and Subject Descriptors: I.3.3 [Computer Graphics]: Picture/Image Generation; I.4.8 [Image Processing and Computer Vision]: Scene Analysis; J.5 [Computer Applications]: Arts and Humanities General Terms: Algorithms, Human Factors Additional Key Words and Phrases: Modeling and rendering, human perception, impossible figure, nonphotorealistic rendering ACM Reference Format: Wu, T.-P., Fu, C.-W., Yeung, S.-K., Jia, J., and Tang, C.-K. 2010. Modeling and rendering of impossible figures. ACM Trans. Graph. 29, 2, Article 13 (March 2010), 15 pages. DOI = 10.1145/1731047.1731051 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1731047.1731051 1. -
First Symposium on Aviation Psychology. Proceedings of the Symposium on Aviation Psychology (Columbus, Ohio, April 21 and 22, 1981)
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 219 236 SE 038 287 AUTHOR Jensen, R. S. TITLE First Symposium on Aviation Psychology. Proceedings of the Symposium on Aviation Psychology (Columbus, Ohio, April 21 and 22, 1981). INSTITUTION Ohio State Univ., Columbus. Aviation Psychology Lab. SPONS AGENCY .Battelle Memorial Iftst., Columbus, Ohio. Columbus Labs.; National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Mountain View, Calif. Ames Research Center. REPORT NO APL-TR-1-81 PUB DATE Apr 81 NOTE 419p.; Also sponsored by the Association of Aviation Psychologists. EDRS PRICE- MF01/PC17 Plus Postage: DESCRIPTORS *Aerospace Education; *Aircraft Pilots; Aviation Technology; *Flight Training; Higher Education; *Human Factors Engineering; *Performance Factors; *Psychology; Visual Perception IDENTIFIERS *Aviation Psychology ABSTRACT This volume contains five complete manuscripts and two abstracts presented, and three papers submitted but not presented, at this symposium on aviation psychology. The objective of the sympo4um was to critically examine the ympact of high technology on the role, responsibility, authority, and performance of human operators in modern aircraft and air traffic control systems. Papers are grouped by the following subject area categoOes: 1) cockpit monitoring concepts; 2) cockpit information systems; 3) pilot judgment; 4) vision and visual perception; 5) crew workload, coordination, and complement; 6) pilot selection; 7) pilot training; and 8) performance assessment. (Author/JN) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NATIONAL INSTITUTE Or EDUCATION E D, A T,(AAI HE,),;PL_S EN,(-1-4 TECHNICAL REPORT: APL-1-81 I ni u,n uun, i1.I Ir 1 11 1 I +, \If -1st First Symposium onAviation Psychology skgil 21 and 22, 1981 The Aviation Psychology Laboratory The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio Convener: R. -
Author Index
Author Index Aarons. L. 655, 672 Adrian. E.D .. Matthews. R. Allum. 1.H.1.. see Dichgans. Aarons. L.. Halasz. H.K .. Ri 555. 566 1. 788. 791. 798 sen. A.H. 444. 483 Agamy, G .. see May. 1.G. Allyn. M.R .. see Festinger, Aarons. L.. see Riesen. A.H. lOS. 139 L. 563. 567 444.486 Ahr. P .. see Pasnak. R. 497, Alpern. M. 195.210.340. Abadi, R .. see Kulikowski. 519 350. 630. 632, 634. 648 1.1. 22. 37 Ahrens. R. 441. 483. 597. Alpern. M .. Rushton. Aborn. see Rubenstein 613 600,605 W.A.H. 632, 648 Abramov. r., see Valois. R.L. Ainsworth. W.A. 174 Altman, 1., see Bayer. S.A. de 6,36 Aitkin. L.M., see Moore. 912.913 Abramson, A.S .. Lisker, L. D.R. 378, 432 Amblard. Cremieux 788 362, 368. 371 Aiu. P .. see Dayton. G.O., Amblard. B .. see Flandrin. Abramson. A.S .. see Lisker. lr. 317.324.352 1.M. 423.429 L. 362. 367, 373 Akimoto. C .. see Mizuno, N. Ambler, S .. see Haggard, Ackroyd, C. Humphrey. 786. 802 M.P. 163,175 N.K., Warrington, E.K. Akishige, Y. 708 Ambrose, 1.A. 596. 605 381,427.494,517.540. Albert, D.G .. see lng, M. Amelang. W .. see Ewert. 1. 545 470, 485 P. 269,284 Acuna, C, see Mountcastle, Albert, M.L.. Bear, D. 721, Ames, A. 708 V.B. 901,917 726 Ames. A., Ogle, K.N., Glid Adair, E.R., Stevens. 1.C. Albrecht, D.G., see Valois, don, G.H. -
Object Perception As Bayesian Inference
UCLA Department of Statistics Papers Title Object Perception as Bayesian Inference Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9q6553kr Authors Kersten, Daniel Mamassian, Pascal Yuille, Alan L Publication Date 2004 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Object Perception as Bayesian Inference 1 Object Perception as Bayesian Inference Daniel Kersten Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota Pascal Mamassian Department of Psychology, University of Glasgow Alan Yuille Departments of Statistics and Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles KEYWORDS: shape, material, depth, perception, vision, neural, psychophysics, fMRI, com- puter vision ABSTRACT: We perceive the shapes and material properties of objects quickly and reliably despite the complexity and objective ambiguities of natural images. Typical images are highly complex because they consist of many objects embedded in background clutter. Moreover, the image features of an object are extremely variable and ambiguous due to the effects of projection, occlusion, background clutter, and illumination. The very success of everyday vision implies neural mechanisms, yet to be understood, that discount irrelevant information and organize ambiguous or \noisy" local image features into objects and surfaces. Recent work in Bayesian theories of visual perception has shown how complexity may be managed and ambiguity resolved through the task-dependent, probabilistic integration of prior object knowledge with image features. CONTENTS OBJECT -
Optical Illusions Fascinate Us, Challenging
Visual Neuroscience Optical Illusions ptical illusions fascinate us, challenging our • Luminance and contrast default notion that what we see is real. They • Motion Odemonstrate that all our perception is illusion, in • Geometric or angle illusions a sense – incoming sensory information is interpreted, • 3D interpretation: size constancy and impossible yielding the internal representation of the world. figures Therefore, after our eyes have filtered the visual input we • Cognitive/Gestalt effects need sound judgement of information in order to create • Colour our inner reality: “Your senses then you’ll have to trust, / and show examples of the first four. Many more examples of They’ll let you see what’s true and just, / Should reason illusions can be found at <http://www.michaelbach.de/ot>. Professor Michael Bach directs 8 keep your mind awake”. the Section Visual Function / What is an optical illusion? “I know it when I see one” Electrophysiology in the Dept. of could not be farther off the track – as the best illusions Ophthalmology, University of are the ones where a discrepancy from reality is not ‘seen’ Freiburg, Germany. His main interest is vision research, he pro- until one uses other modalities (eg. touch) or instru- vides a routine clinical service in ments (rulers, light metres). And even when we know ophthalmic electrodiagnostics and that we are subject to an optical illusion, most illusory is President of the International percepts still persist – a phenomenon called cognitive Society for Clinical Electro- physiology of Vision (ISCEV). impenetrability.15 As Gregory9 aptly stated it “it is surpris- Figure 1: The Hermann grid on the left with ingly hard to define ‘illusion’ in a satisfactory way”. -
0136 CUB Cartone#2.Indd
When the major exhibition titled The Responsive Eye Vasarely opened at the New York Museum of Modern Art in 1965, and the ‘Op Art’ it made Optical Art famous almost overnight. The limelight was stolen by two Europeans: Josef Albers, who continued Phenomenon the legacy of the Bauhaus in his art, and Victor Vasarely. Both men were represented at the show with six works each. But márton orosz whereas Albers, oft neglected by the critics, was turned into the black sheep of the movement by contemporary art history writing,2 for Vasarely, who was just reaching the peak of his career, the show served as a launch pad to fame. The Responsive Eye was intended to take stock of the ‘…here comes Op Art!’1 latest endeavours in Optical Art. William C. Seitz, curator of victor vasarely, the exhibition, wove his concept not around the spectacle 18 April 1964 of the artworks, but around the very act of seeing. The discursive space generated between the work and the viewer became the theme of the show. The exhibits Seitz selected were all created in accordance with the so-called ‘effective theory’, as opposed to works driven by the ‘genetic aesthetic’ that conveyed the experiences of the artist in the form of a creative act, such as action painting, which recorded the dialogue between the artwork and the artist. Seitz formulated a new style category for ‘effective’ works that required the active participation of the viewer, which he called ‘perceptual abstraction’,3 borrowing a term coined by the art critic and psychologist Rudolf Arnheim.4 The exhibition catalogue made it clear that the ‘Eye’ in the title was not identical with the organ of sight – it meant more than an internal optical device that responds to environmental stimuli. -
Abstracts of the 51St Annual Conference of the Italian Society of Neurology
Neurological Sciences (2020) 41 (Suppl 1):S1–S347 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-020-04753-3 ABSTRACTS Abstracts of the 51st Annual Conference of the Italian Society of Neurology CASE REPORTS References: - L. Mandigers et al. A case report of iatrogenic deterioration of yet LISTERIA MONOCYTOGENES RHOMBENCEPHALITIS: A undiagnosed Rhombencephalitis; always be careful with corticoids. CHALLENGING DIAGNOSIS -BMC Clinical Pathology (2018);27;18:15 - Décard BF et al. Listeria rhombencephalitis mimicking a demyelin- S. M. Angelocola, M. Acciarri, R. Angeloni, P. Cardinali, F. Forconesi, I. ating event in an immunocompetent young patient. Multiple Paolino, E. Pucci Sclerosis (2017) Jan;23(1):123-125 - Bartt R. et al. Listeria and atypical presentations of Listeria in the Neurology Unit, "A. Murri" Hospital (Fermo) central nervous system. Semin Neurol. (2000);20(3):361-73 Neurolisteriosis may manifest in humans as meningitis, meningoen- cephalitis, and rhombencephalitis. Compared to other pathogens, PAINLESS WINGED SCAPULA AS THE ONSET OF A VERNET Listeria Monocytogenes (Lm) has a brainstem predilection. Contrary SYNDROME: A CASE REPORT to the more common meningitis, Lm rhombencephalitis occurs rarely and mostly in healthy and immunocompetent people. We describe the S. M. Angelocola, M. Acciarri, R. Angeloni, P. Cardinali, F. Forconesi, I. case of a 71-year-old immunocompetent woman previously in good Paolino, E. Pucci health.Aboutaweekbeforehospitaladmission,thepatientexperienced nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Subsequently, dysarthria associated Neurology Unit, "A. Murri" Hospital (Fermo) with mild binocular diplopia appeared. At the time of admission, neu- rological examination showed dysarthria and right sixth and seventh “ ” “ ” cranial nerve palsy. The meningeal irritation signs were negative and The Jugular Foramen Syndrome (JFS) or Vernet syndrome (VS) body temperature was 36°C. -
OBJECT PERCEPTION AS BAYESIAN INFERENCE Daniel
17 Dec 2003 9:0 AR AR207-PS55-10.tex AR207-PS55-10.sgm LaTeX2e(2002/01/18) P1: GCE 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142005 Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2004. 55:271–304 doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142005 Copyright c 2004 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved First published online as a Review in Advance on October 6, 2003 OBJECT PERCEPTION AS BAYESIAN INFERENCE Daniel Kersten Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455; email: [email protected] Pascal Mamassian Department of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QB, Scotland Alan Yuille Departments of Statistics and Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095-1554 Key Words shape, material, depth, vision, neural, psychophysics, fMRI, computer vision ■ Abstract We perceive the shapes and material properties of objects quickly and reliably despite the complexity and objective ambiguities of natural images. Typical im- ages are highly complex because they consist of many objects embedded in background clutter. Moreover, the image features of an object are extremely variable and ambiguous owing to the effects of projection, occlusion, background clutter, and illumination. The very success of everyday vision implies neural mechanisms, yet to be understood, that discount irrelevant information and organize ambiguous or noisy local image features into objects and surfaces. Recent work in Bayesian theories of visual perception has shown how complexity may be managed and ambiguity resolved through the task- dependent,