Visual Object Recognition Using Deformable Models of Vehicles

This workshop paper reports recent developments to a vision system for traffic interpretation which relies extensively on the use of geometrical and scene context. Firstly, a new approach to pose refinement is reported, based on forces derived from prominent image derivatives found close to an initial hypothesis. Secondly, a parameterised vehicle model is reported, able to represent different vehicle classes. This general vehicle model has been fitted to sample data, and subjected to a Principal Component Analysis to create a deformable model of common car types having 6 parameters. We show that the new pose recovery technique is also able to operate on the PCA model, to allow the structure of an initial vehicle hypothesis to be adapted to fit the prevailing context. We report initial experiments with the model, which demonstrate significant improvements to pose recovery.

Biologically motivated model for object detection and identification in real-world scenes

The classical computer vision methods can only weakly emulate some of the multi-level parallelisms in signal processing and information sharing that takes place in different parts of the primates’ visual system thus enabling it to accomplish many diverse functions of visual perception. One of the main functions of the primates’ vision is to detect and recognise objects in natural scenes despite all the linear and non-linear variations of the objects and their environment. The superior performance of the primates’ visual system compared to what machine vision systems have been able to achieve to date, motivates scientists and researchers to further explore this area in pursuit of more efficient vision systems inspired by natural models. In this paper building blocks for a hierarchical efficient object recognition model are proposed. Incorporating the attention-based processing would lead to a system that will process the visual data in a non-linear way focusing only on the regions of interest and hence reducing the time to achieve real-time performance. Further, it is suggested to modify the visual cortex model for recognizing objects by adding non-linearities in the ventral path consistent with earlier discoveries as reported by researchers in the neuro-physiology of vision.

Peripersonal space: a multisensory interface for body-object interactions

Research in the last four decades has brought a considerable advance in our understanding of how the brain synthesizes information arising from different sensory modalities. Indeed, many cortical and subcortical areas, beyond those traditionally considered to be ‘associative,’ have been shown to be involved in multisensory interaction and integration (Ghazanfar and Schroeder 2006). Visuo-tactile interaction is of particular interest, because of the prominent role played by vision in guiding our actions and anticipating their tactile consequences in everyday life. In this chapter, we focus on the functional role that visuo-tactile processing may play in driving two types of body-object interactions: avoidance and approach. We will first review some basic features of visuo-tactile interactions, as revealed by electrophysiological studies in monkeys. These will prove to be relevant for interpreting the subsequent evidence arising from human studies. A crucial point that will be stressed is that these visuo-tactile mechanisms have not only sensory, but also motor-related activity that qualifies them as multisensory-motor interfaces. Evidence will then be presented for the existence of functionally homologous processing in the human brain, both from neuropsychological research in brain-damaged patients and in healthy participants. The final part of the chapter will focus on some recent studies in humans showing that the human motor system is provided with a multisensory interface that allows for continuous monitoring of the space near the body (i.e., peripersonal space). We further demonstrate that multisensory processing can be modulated on-line as a consequence of interacting with objects. This indicates that, far from being passive, the monitoring of peripersonal space is an active process subserving actions between our body and objects located in the space around us.