ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2024
Toward viewing behavior for aerial scene categorization.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Previous work has demonstrated similarities and differences between aerial and terrestrial image viewing. Aerial scene categorization, a pivotal visual processing task for gathering geoinformation, heavily depends on rotation-invariant information. Aerial image-centered research has revealed effects of low-level features on performance of various aerial image interpretation tasks. However, there are fewer studies of viewing behavior for aerial scene categorization and of higher-level factors that might influence that categorization. In this paper, experienced subjects' eye movements were recorded while they were asked to categorize aerial scenes. A typical viewing center bias was observed. Eye movement patterns varied among categories. We explored the relationship of nine image statistics to observers' eye movements. Results showed that if the images were less homogeneous, and/or if they contained fewer or no salient diagnostic objects, viewing behavior became more exploratory. Higher- and object-level image statistics were predictive at both the image and scene category levels. Scanpaths were generally organized and small differences in scanpath randomness could be roughly captured by critical object saliency. Participants tended to fixate on critical objects. Image statistics included in this study showed rotational invariance. The results supported our hypothesis that the availability of diagnostic objects strongly influences eye movements in this task. In addition, this study provides supporting evidence for Loschky et al.'s (Journal of Vision, 15(6), 11, 2015) speculation that aerial scenes are categorized on the basis of image parts and individual objects. The findings were discussed in relation to theories of scene perception and their implications for automation development.
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.