Abstract
Animals and humans recognize biological movements and actions with high robustness and accuracy. It still remains to be clarified how different neural mechanisms processing form and motion information contribute to this recognition process. We investigate this question using simple learning-based neurophysiologically inspired mechanisms for biological motion recognition. In quantitative simulations we show the following results: (1) Point light stimuli with strongly degraded local motion information can be recognized with a neural model for the (dorsal) motion pathway. (2) The recognition of degraded biological motion stimuli is dependent on previous experience with point light stimuli. (3) Opponent motion features seem to be critical for the recognition of these stimuli.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
J. A. Beintema and M. Lappe. Perception og biological motion without local image motion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(8):5661–5663, April 2002.
Martin Giese and Tomaso Poggio. Neural mechanisms for the recognition of biological motion. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(3):179–192, March 2003.
Martin A. Giese and Lucia M. Vaina. Pathways in the analysis of biological motion: computational model and fmri results. In Proceedings of the 24th European Conference on Visual Perception (ECVP), August 2001.
Emily D. Grossman and Randolph Blake. Brain areas active during visual perception of biological motion. Neuron, 35:1167–1175, September 2002.
Gunnar Johansson. Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception and Psychophysics, 14:201–211, 1973.
George Mather, Kirstyn Radford, and Sophie West. Low-level visual processing of biological motion. Proc. R. Soc. Lon. B: Biological Sciences, 249(1325):149–155, August 1992.
Paul Mineiro and David Zipser. Analysis of direction selectivity arising from recurrent cortical interactions. Neural Networks, 10:353–371, 1998.
Maximilian Riesenhuber and Tomaso Poggio. Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 2(11):1019–1025, November 1999.
Lucia M. Vaina, Marjorie Lemay, Don C. Bienfang, Albert Y. Choi, and Ken Nakayama. Intact “biological motion” and “structure from motion” perception in a patient with impaired motion mechanisms: a case study. Visual Neuroscience, 5(4):353–369, October 1990.
Lucia M. Vaina, Jeffrey Solomon, Sanjida Chowdhury, Pawan Sinha, and John W. Belliveau. Functional neuroanatomy of biological motion perception in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(20):11656–11661, September2 001.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Casile, A., Giese, M. (2003). Roles of Motion and Form in Biological Motion Recognition. In: Kaynak, O., Alpaydin, E., Oja, E., Xu, L. (eds) Artificial Neural Networks and Neural Information Processing — ICANN/ICONIP 2003. ICANN ICONIP 2003 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2714. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44989-2_102
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44989-2_102
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40408-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44989-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive