ArticleJournal of vision2024
Classification images for aerial images capture visual expertise for binocular disparity and a prior for lighting from above.
Article in Journal of vision, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Using a novel approach to classification images (CIs), we investigated the visual expertise of surveyors for luminance and binocular disparity cues simultaneously after screening for stereoacuity. Stereoscopic aerial images of hedges and ditches were classified in 10,000 trials by six trained remote sensing surveyors and six novices. Images were heavily masked with luminance and disparity noise simultaneously. Hedge and ditch images had reversed disparity on around half the trials meaning hedges became ditch-like and vice versa. The hedge and ditch images were also flipped vertically on around half the trials, changing the direction of the light source and completing a 2 × 2 × 2 stimulus design. CIs were generated by accumulating the noise textures associated with "hedge" and "ditch" classifications, respectively, and subtracting one from the other. Typical CIs had a central peak with one or two negative side-lobes. We found clear differences in the amplitudes and shapes of perceptual templates across groups and noise-type, with experts prioritizing binocular disparity and using this more effectively. Contrariwise, novices used luminance cues more than experts meaning that task motivation alone could not explain group differences. Asymmetries in the luminance CIs revealed individual differences for lighting interpretation, with experts less prone to assume lighting from above, consistent with their training on aerial images of UK scenes lit by a southerly sun. Our results show that (i) dual noise in images can be used to produce simultaneous CI pairs, (ii) expertise for disparity cues does not depend on stereoacuity, (iii) CIs reveal the visual strategies developed by experts, (iv) top-down perceptual biases can be overcome with long-term learning effects, and (v) CIs have practical potential for directing visual training.
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.