skip to main content
10.1145/2377576.2377582acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespermisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Towards standardization of metrics for evaluation of artificial visual attention

Published:28 September 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

Standardized methods and metrics for evaluating progress of research is important in every field of science. Computational modeling of visual attention is an important area of research that aims towards machine vision according to the role model of nature. Standards for quantitative evaluation of research achievements in this field are still missing. This paper proposes some measurement methods and metrics that can be used as conventions for evaluation of artificial attention models. The proposed methodology also takes into account the needs of assessing attention under different visual behaviors and considers performance against increasing levels of visual complexity. The measurement methods for the quantities used in the evaluation metrics are designed to make autonomous machine-based evaluation feasible. Creating traces of performance by different attention models using the proposed metrics can provide an objective analysis of the state of the art in this field.

References

  1. T. Avraham and M. Lindenbaum. Esaliency (extended saliency): Meaningful attention using stochastic image modeling. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 32(4):693--708, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. M. Z. Aziz and B. Mertsching. An attentional approach for perceptual grouping of spatially distributed patterns. In DAGM 2007, LNCS 4713, pages 345--354, Heidelberg - Germany, 2007. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. M. Z. Aziz and B. Mertsching. Fast and robust generation of feature maps for region-based visual attention. Transactions on Image Processing, 17:633--644, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. Z. Aziz and B. Mertsching. Towards standardized metrics and methods for evaluation of visual attention models. In WAPCV 2008, pages 180--193, Santorini - Greece, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. M. Z. Aziz and B. Mertsching. Towards Standardization of Evaluation Metrics and Methods for Visual Attention Models. Attention in Cognitive Systems, LNAI, 5395/2009:227--241, March 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. M. Clauss, P. Bayerl, and H. Neumann. A statistical measure for evaluating regions-of-interest based attention algorithms. In DAGM 2004, LNCS 3175, pages 383--390. Springer, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. B. A. Draper and A. Lionelle. Evaluation of selective attention under similarity transforms. In WAPCV 03, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. S. Frintrop, G. Backer, and E. Rome. Goal-directed search with a top-down modulated computational attention system. In DAGM 2005, LNCS 3663, pages 117--124. Springer, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. N. Hawes and J. Wyatt. Towards context-sensitive visual attention. In Second International Cognitive Vision Workshop (ICVW06), 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Heinen and P. Engel. Evaluation of visual attention models under 2d similarity transformations. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM symposium on Applied Computing, pages 1156--1160. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. H. Hügli, T. Jost, and N. Ouerhani. Model performance for visual attention in real 3D color scenes. In IWINAC 2005, pages 469--478. LNCS 3562, Springer, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. L. Itti, U. Koch, and E. Niebur. A model of saliency-based visual attention for rapid scene analysis. Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 20:1254--1259, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. G. Marmitt and A. T. Duchowski. Modeling visual attention in vr:measuring the accuracy of predicted scanpaths. In EUROGRAPHICS 2002, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. O. L. Meur, P. L. Callet, D. Barba, and D. Thoreau. A coherent computational approach to model bottom-up visual attention. Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 28:802--817, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. T. Michalke, A. Gepperth, M. Schneider, J. Fritsch, and C. Goerick. Towards a human-like vision system for resource-constrained intelligent cars. In ICVS 2007, pages 264--275. Bielefeld University eCollections, Germany, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. V. Navalpakkam and L. Itti. Modeling the influence of task on attention. Vision Research, pages 205--231, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. G. Osterberg. Topography of the layer of rods and cones in the. human retina. Acta Ophthalmologica, 6:11--102, 1935.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. N. Ouerhani, R. von Wartburg, H. Hügli, and R. Müri. Empirical validation of the saliency-based model of visual attention. Electronic Letters on Computer Vision and Image Analysis, 3(1):13--24, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. R. J. Peters, A. Iyer, L. Itti, and C. Koch. Components of bottom-up gaze allocation in natural images. Vision Research, 45:2397--2416, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. S. Polyak. The Retina. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA, 1941.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. C. M. Privitera and L. W. Stark. Algorithms for defining visual regions-of-interest: Comparison with eye fixations. Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 9:970--982, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. M. Riesenhuber. Object recognition in cortex: Neural mechanisms, and possible roles for attention. In Neurobiology of attention, pages 279--287. Elsevier, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. A. L. Yarbus. Eye Movements and Vision. Plenum Press, New York, 1967.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  1. Towards standardization of metrics for evaluation of artificial visual attention

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      PerMIS '10: Proceedings of the 10th Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems Workshop
      September 2010
      386 pages
      ISBN:9781450302906
      DOI:10.1145/2377576

      Copyright © 2010 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 28 September 2010

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader