↓ Skip to main content

Modeling the shape hierarchy for visually guided grasping

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Modeling the shape hierarchy for visually guided grasping
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2014.00132
Pubmed ID
Authors

Omid Rezai, Ashley Kleinhans, Eduardo Matallanas, Ben Selby, Bryan P. Tripp

Abstract

The monkey anterior intraparietal area (AIP) encodes visual information about three-dimensional object shape that is used to shape the hand for grasping. We modeled shape tuning in visual AIP neurons and its relationship with curvature and gradient information from the caudal intraparietal area (CIP). The main goal was to gain insight into the kinds of shape parameterizations that can account for AIP tuning and that are consistent with both the inputs to AIP and the role of AIP in grasping. We first experimented with superquadric shape parameters. We considered superquadrics because they occupy a role in robotics that is similar to AIP, in that superquadric fits are derived from visual input and used for grasp planning. We also experimented with an alternative shape parameterization that was based on an Isomap dimension reduction of spatial derivatives of depth (i.e., distance from the observer to the object surface). We considered an Isomap-based model because its parameters lacked discontinuities between similar shapes. When we matched the dimension of the Isomap to the number of superquadric parameters, the superquadric model fit the AIP data somewhat more closely. However, higher-dimensional Isomaps provided excellent fits. Also, we found that the Isomap parameters could be approximated much more accurately than superquadric parameters by feedforward neural networks with CIP-like inputs. We conclude that Isomaps, or perhaps alternative dimension reductions of visual inputs to AIP, provide a promising model of AIP electrophysiology data. Further work is needed to test whether such shape parameterizations actually provide an effective basis for grasp control.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Canada 1 4%
Unknown 20 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 5 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 26%
Neuroscience 5 22%
Engineering 3 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 9%
Psychology 2 9%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2014.
All research outputs
#15,310,749
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#870
of 1,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,494
of 260,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#22
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 260,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.