IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1005743.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Object detection through search with a foveated visual system

Author

Listed:
  • Emre Akbas
  • Miguel P Eckstein

Abstract

Humans and many other species sense visual information with varying spatial resolution across the visual field (foveated vision) and deploy eye movements to actively sample regions of interests in scenes. The advantage of such varying resolution architecture is a reduced computational, hence metabolic cost. But what are the performance costs of such processing strategy relative to a scheme that processes the visual field at high spatial resolution? Here we first focus on visual search and combine object detectors from computer vision with a recent model of peripheral pooling regions found at the V1 layer of the human visual system. We develop a foveated object detector that processes the entire scene with varying resolution, uses retino-specific object detection classifiers to guide eye movements, aligns its fovea with regions of interest in the input image and integrates observations across multiple fixations. We compared the foveated object detector against a non-foveated version of the same object detector which processes the entire image at homogeneous high spatial resolution. We evaluated the accuracy of the foveated and non-foveated object detectors identifying 20 different objects classes in scenes from a standard computer vision data set (the PASCAL VOC 2007 dataset). We show that the foveated object detector can approximate the performance of the object detector with homogeneous high spatial resolution processing while bringing significant computational cost savings. Additionally, we assessed the impact of foveation on the computation of bottom-up saliency. An implementation of a simple foveated bottom-up saliency model with eye movements showed agreement in the selection of top salient regions of scenes with those selected by a non-foveated high resolution saliency model. Together, our results might help explain the evolution of foveated visual systems with eye movements as a solution that preserves perceptual performance in visual search while resulting in computational and metabolic savings to the brain.Author summary: A large number of species from primates to shrimps do not see the visual world with uniform spatial detail. An area with heightened sensitivity to spatial detail, known as the fovea in mammals is oriented through eye and head movements to scrutinize regions of interest in the visual environment. But why did many species evolve such foveated architecture for vision? Seeing with high spatial detail everywhere requires greater neuronal machinery and energy consumption, thus the advantage of a foveated visual system is to reduce metabolic costs. But does having a foveated visual system incur a price to the performance of the organism in visual tasks? Here, we show using a computer vision object detection model, that the foveated version of the model can attain similar search performance to its non-foveated version that processes the entire visual field with high spatial detail. The results might help explain the evolution of foveated visual systems with eye movements as a solution that preserves perceptual performance while resulting in computational and metabolic savings to the brain.

Suggested Citation

  • Emre Akbas & Miguel P Eckstein, 2017. "Object detection through search with a foveated visual system," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-28, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1005743
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005743
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005743
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005743&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005743?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sheng Zhang & Miguel P Eckstein, 2010. "Evolution and Optimality of Similar Neural Mechanisms for Perception and Action during Search," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-11, September.
    2. Camille Morvan & Laurence T Maloney, 2012. "Human Visual Search Does Not Maximize the Post-Saccadic Probability of Identifying Targets," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(2), pages 1-11, February.
    3. Jiri Najemnik & Wilson S. Geisler, 2005. "Optimal eye movement strategies in visual search," Nature, Nature, vol. 434(7031), pages 387-391, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frederick Callaway & Antonio Rangel & Thomas L Griffiths, 2021. "Fixation patterns in simple choice reflect optimal information sampling," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-29, March.
    2. Hang Zhang & Camille Morvan & Louis-Alexandre Etezad-Heydari & Laurence T Maloney, 2012. "Very Slow Search and Reach: Failure to Maximize Expected Gain in an Eye-Hand Coordination Task," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-12, October.
    3. Camille Morvan & Laurence T Maloney, 2012. "Human Visual Search Does Not Maximize the Post-Saccadic Probability of Identifying Targets," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(2), pages 1-11, February.
    4. Joseph Snider & Dongpyo Lee & Howard Poizner & Sergei Gepshtein, 2015. "Prospective Optimization with Limited Resources," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Constantin Carapencea & Irina Mocanu, 2015. "Real-Time Gaze Tracking With A Single Camera," Romanian Economic Business Review, Romanian-American University, vol. 9(1), pages 37-49, May.
    6. Michel Wedel & Rik Pieters & Ralf Lans, 2023. "Modeling Eye Movements During Decision Making: A Review," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 697-729, June.
    7. Sheng Zhang & Miguel P Eckstein, 2010. "Evolution and Optimality of Similar Neural Mechanisms for Perception and Action during Search," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-11, September.
    8. Sang-Hoon Yeo & David W Franklin & Daniel M Wolpert, 2016. "When Optimal Feedback Control Is Not Enough: Feedforward Strategies Are Required for Optimal Control with Active Sensing," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Niklas Wilming & Simon Harst & Nico Schmidt & Peter König, 2013. "Saccadic Momentum and Facilitation of Return Saccades Contribute to an Optimal Foraging Strategy," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1005743. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.