ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Neural modeling of flow rendering effectiveness
Full text PdfPdf (910 KB)
Source
Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization archive
Proceedings of the 5th symposium on Applied perception in graphics and visualization table of contents
Los Angeles, California
SESSION: Visualization table of contents
Pages 171-178  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-59593-981-4
Authors
Daniel Pineo  University of New Hampshire
Colin Ware  University of New Hampshire
Sponsor
SIGGRAPH: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 8,   Downloads (12 Months): 65,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1394281.1394313
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

It has been previously proposed that understanding the mechanisms of contour perception can provide a theory for why some flow rendering methods allow for better judgments of advection pathways than others. In the present paper we develop this theory through a numerical model of the primary visual cortex of the brain (Visual Area 1) where contour enhancement is understood to occur according to most neurological theories. We apply a two-stage model of contour perception to various visual representations of flow fields evaluated by Laidlaw et al [2001]. In the first stage, contour enhancement is modeled based on Li's [1998] cortical model. In the second stage, a model of contour integration is proposed designed to support the task of advection path tracing. The model yields insights into the relative strengths of different flow visualization methods for the task of visualizing advection pathways.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Blake, R. and Holopigan, K. 1985. Orientation of selectivity in cats and humans assessed by masking. Vision Research 23, 1: 1459--1467.
2
 
3
Daugman, J. 1985. Uncertainty relation for resolution in space, spatial frequency and orientation optimized by two-dimensional cortical filters. Journal of the Optical Society of America, A/2: 1160--1169.
 
4
Elder, J.; Krupnik, A.; Johnston, L., 2003. Contour grouping with prior models, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 25, 6, 661--674.
 
5
Field, D., Hayes, A., and Hess, R. 1993. Contour integration by the human visual system: Evidence for a local "association field". Vision Research 33, 2, 173--193.
 
6
Hubel, D., and Wiesel, T. 1962. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. J. Physiol., 160, 106--154.
 
7
Hubel, D., and Wiesel, T. 1968. Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. J. Physiol, 195, 215--243.
 
8
Janiszewski, C. 1998. The influence of display characteristics on visual search exploratory search behavior. Journal of Consumer Research 25, 290--301.
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
Lund, N. 2001. Attention and Pattern Recognition, Routledge.
 
13
Singer, W., and Gray, C. 1995. Visual feature integration and the temporal correlation hypothesis. Annu. Rev. Neuroscience, 18, 555--586.
14
 
15
 
16
 
17

Collaborative Colleagues:
Daniel Pineo: colleagues
Colin Ware: colleagues