↓ Skip to main content

Modeling depth from motion parallax with the motion/pursuit ratio

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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 depth from motion parallax with the motion/pursuit ratio
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01103
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Nawrot, Michael Ratzlaff, Zachary Leonard, Keith Stroyan

Abstract

The perception of unambiguous scaled depth from motion parallax relies on both retinal image motion and an extra-retinal pursuit eye movement signal. The motion/pursuit ratio represents a dynamic geometric model linking these two proximal cues to the ratio of depth to viewing distance. An important step in understanding the visual mechanisms serving the perception of depth from motion parallax is to determine the relationship between these stimulus parameters and empirically determined perceived depth magnitude. Observers compared perceived depth magnitude of dynamic motion parallax stimuli to static binocular disparity comparison stimuli at three different viewing distances, in both head-moving and head-stationary conditions. A stereo-viewing system provided ocular separation for stereo stimuli and monocular viewing of parallax stimuli. For each motion parallax stimulus, a point of subjective equality (PSE) was estimated for the amount of binocular disparity that generates the equivalent magnitude of perceived depth from motion parallax. Similar to previous results, perceived depth from motion parallax had significant foreshortening. Head-moving conditions produced even greater foreshortening due to the differences in the compensatory eye movement signal. An empirical version of the motion/pursuit law, termed the empirical motion/pursuit ratio, which models perceived depth magnitude from these stimulus parameters, is proposed.

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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 31 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 24%
Student > Master 8 24%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Professor 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 24%
Neuroscience 6 18%
Engineering 4 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Computer Science 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 6 18%
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 28 January 2015.
All research outputs
#18,390,814
of 22,780,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,074
of 29,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,859
of 254,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#331
of 374 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,693 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 254,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 374 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.