Factors influencing perceived angular velocity

Abstract

The assumption that humans are able to perceive and process angular kinematics is critical to many structure-from-motion and optical flow models. The current studies investigate this sensitivity, and examine several factors likely to influence angular velocity perception. In particular, three factors are considered: (1)the extent to which perceived angular velocity is determined by edge transitions of surface elements, (2) the extent to which angular velocity estimates are influenced by instantaneous linear velocities of surface elements, and (3)whether element-velocity effects are related to three-dimensional (3-D) tangential velocities or to two-dimensional (2-D) image velocities. Edge-transition rate biased angular velocity estimates only when edges were highly salient. Element velocities influenced perceived angular velocity; this bias was related to 2-D image velocity rather than 3-D tangential velocity. Despite these biases, however, judgments were most strongly determined by the true angular velocity. Sensitivity to this higher order motion parameter was surprisingly good, for rotations both in depth (y-axis) and parallel to the line of sight (z-axis).

Perception of three-dimensional angular rotation

“…Although both sphere size and point location had significant influences on perceived rotation in one analysis or another, neither effect approached what would be required if the subjects were making sole, or even substantial, use of linear velocity in their judgments. These results and conclusions are similar to those of Kaiser (1991).…”

“…Nonetheless, despite a growing interest in the process whereby the visual system recovers three-dimensional (3-D) structure from two-dimensional (2-D) image motion (e.g., Braunstein, 1976;Braunstein & Tittle, 1988; Hildreth, 1984;Lappin, Doner, & Kottas, 1980;Petersik, 1979 Petersik, , 1980aPetersik, , 1987 Sperling, Landy, Dosher, & Perkins, 1989;Ullman, 1979), relatively little work has been done on the basic psychophysics of the 3-D motion percept produced with rotation simulations. For example, only Kaiser (1990Kaiser ( , 1991 has asked what the dL is for pairs of objects in 3-D rotation. The present experiments, although conceived independently, extend the issues addressed by Kaiser (1990Kaiser ( , 1991, as well as her data.…”

“…For example, only Kaiser (1990Kaiser ( , 1991 has asked what the dL is for pairs of objects in 3-D rotation. The present experiments, although conceived independently, extend the issues addressed by Kaiser (1990Kaiser ( , 1991, as well as her data.Kaiser's (1990) stimuli were "pseudoshaded" simulations of solid cubes (and in one case, a bispherenoid) displayed in polar projection. In separate experiments, she examined the effects of pairs of stimuli rotating about I am grateful to G. Andersen, M. Braunstein, P. Werkhoven, and an anonymous reviewer for their detailed and insightful comments on an earlier version of this manuscript.…”

“…For example, only Kaiser (1990Kaiser ( , 1991 has asked what the dL is for pairs of objects in 3-D rotation. The present experiments, although conceived independently, extend the issues addressed by Kaiser (1990Kaiser ( , 1991, as well as her data.…”

Rotational and translational components of motion parallax: Observers' sensitivity and implications for three-dimensional computer graphics.

“…For the cone stimulus group, there was no effect for sign of distortion. (Kaiser, 1990;Kaiser & Calderone, 1991), the low rates of rotation that usually occur during motion parallax might stress the visual system's sensitivity.…”