ArticleJournal of vision2016
Learning the 3-D structure of objects from 2-D views depends on shape, not format.
Article in Journal of vision, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-dimensional shape cues affect human and artificial recognition systems differently.PloS one · 2026Article
- Novel Prototype and Exemplar (NPE) database: A set of 2700 novel 3D images with viewpoint and shape variations.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Standardised images of novel objects created with generative adversarial networks.Scientific data · 2023Article
- The analysis of the structural parameter influences on measurement errors in a binocular 3D reconstruction system: a portable 3D system.PeerJ. Computer science · 2023Article
- Combined Neural Tuning in Human Ventral Temporal Cortex Resolves the Perceptual Ambiguity of Morphed 2D Images.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2020Article
- The functional neuroanatomy of face perception: from brain measurements to deep neural networks.Interface focus · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Humans can learn to recognize new objects just from observing example views. However, it is unknown what structural information enables this learning. To address this question, we manipulated the amount of structural information given to subjects during unsupervised learning by varying the format of the trained views. We then tested how format affected participants' ability to discriminate similar objects across views that were rotated 90° apart. We found that, after training, participants' performance increased and generalized to new views in the same format. Surprisingly, the improvement was similar across line drawings, shape from shading, and shape from shading + stereo even though the latter two formats provide richer depth information compared to line drawings. In contrast, participants' improvement was significantly lower when training used silhouettes, suggesting that silhouettes do not have enough information to generate a robust 3-D structure. To test whether the learned object representations were format-specific or format-invariant, we examined if learning novel objects from example views transfers across formats. We found that learning objects from example line drawings transferred to shape from shading and vice versa. These results have important implications for theories of object recognition because they suggest that (a) learning the 3-D structure of objects does not require rich structural cues during training as long as shape information of internal and external features is provided and (b) learning generates shape-based object representations independent of the training format.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.