4.3 Article

Objects predict fixations better than early saliency

期刊

JOURNAL OF VISION
卷 8, 期 14, 页码 -

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/8.14.18

关键词

attention; eye movements; object recognition; scene recognition

资金

  1. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship
  2. National Institute of Mental Health [T32MH019138]
  3. Office of Naval Research [N00014-06-1-0734]
  4. National Institutes of Health [R01 DA022777]
  5. Swiss National Science Foundation [PA00A-111447]
  6. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [T32MH019138] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  7. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE [R01DA022777] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Humans move their eyes while looking at scenes and pictures. Eye movements correlate with shifts in attention and are thought to be a consequence of optimal resource allocation for high-level tasks such as visual recognition. Models of attention, such as saliency maps, are often built on the assumption that early features (color, contrast, orientation, motion, and so forth) drive attention directly. We explore an alternative hypothesis: Observers attend to interesting objects. To test this hypothesis, we measure the eye position of human observers while they inspect photographs of common natural scenes. Our observers perform different tasks: artistic evaluation, analysis of content, and search. Immediately after each presentation, our observers are asked to name objects they saw. Weighted with recall frequency, these objects predict fixations in individual images better than early saliency, irrespective of task. Also, saliency combined with object positions predicts which objects are frequently named. This suggests that early saliency has only an indirect effect on attention, acting through recognized objects. Consequently, rather than treating attention as mere preprocessing step for object recognition, models of both need to be integrated.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据