skip to main content
article

Human and machine perception of biological motion

Published: 01 December 2006 Publication History

Abstract

More than 30 years ago, Johansson was the first to show that humans are capable of recovering information about the identity and activity of animate creatures rapidly and reliably from very sparse visual inputs - the phenomenon of biological motion. He filmed human actors in a dark setting with just a few strategic points on the body marked by lights - so-called moving light displays (MLDs). Subjects viewing the MLDs reported a vivid impression of moving human forms, and were even able to tell the activity in which the perceived humans were engaged. Subsequently, the phenomenon has been widely studied and many attempts have been made to model and to understand it. Typical questions that arise are: How precisely is the sparse low-level information integrated over space and time to produce the global percept, and how important is world knowledge (e.g., about animal form, locomotion, gravity, etc.)? In an attempt to answer such questions, we have implemented a machine-perception model of biological motion. If the computational model can replicate human data then it might offer clues as to how humans achieve the task. In particular, if it can do so with no or minimal world knowledge then this knowledge cannot be essential to the perception of biological motion. To provide human data for training and against which to assess the model, an extensive psychophysical experiment was undertaken in which 93 subjects were shown 12 categories of MLDs (e.g., normal, walking backwards, inverted, random dots, etc.) and were asked to indicate the presence or absence of natural human motion. Machine perception models were then trained on normal sequences as positive data and random sequences as negative data. Two models were used: a k-nearest neighbour (k-NN) classifier as an exemplar of 'lazy' learning and a back-propagation neural network as an exemplar of 'eager' learning. We find that the k-NN classifier is better able to model the human data but it still fails to represent aspects of knowledge about body shape (especially how relative joint positions change under rotation) that appear to be important to human judgements.

References

[1]
Lazy learning. Artificial Intelligence Review. v11 i1-5. 7-10.
[2]
Perception of biological motion. Perception. v26 i12. 1539-1548.
[3]
Cats perceive biological motion. Psychological Science. v4 i1. 54-57.
[4]
Bobick, A. F., & Davis, J. W. (1996). An appearance-based representation of action. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on pattern recognition, Vienna, Austria (pp. 307-312).
[5]
Motion-based recognition: a survey. Image and Vision Computing. v13 i2. 129-155.
[6]
Coding theory adapted to gait perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. v7 i1. 71-87.
[7]
Recognizing friends by their walk: gait perception without familiarity cues. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society. v9 i5. 353-356.
[8]
Gait perception as an example of how we may perceive events. In: Walk, R., Pick, H.L. (Eds.), Intersensory perception and sensory integration, Plenum, New York, NY. pp. 249-273.
[9]
An expressive three-mode principal components model for gender recognition. Journal of Vision. v4 i5. 362-377.
[10]
Pattern recognition: A statistical approach. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[11]
Computational analyses in cognitive neuro-science: in defense of biological implausibility. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. v6 i2. 173-182.
[12]
Pattern classification and scene analysis. Wiley, New York, NY.
[13]
Pattern classification. 2nd ed. Wiley, New York, NY.
[14]
The perception of biological motion by human infants. Science. v218 i4571. 486-487.
[15]
Neural mechanisms for the recognition of biological movements. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. v4 i3. 179-192.
[16]
Goddard, N. H. (1992). The perception of articulated motion: recognizing moving light displays. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
[17]
The interpretation of biological motion. Biological Cybernetics. v42 i3. 195-204.
[18]
Model-based vision: a program to see a walking person. Image and Vision Computing. v1 i1. 5-20.
[19]
Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception and Psychophysics. v14 i2. 201-211.
[20]
Visual motion perception. Scientific American. v232 i6. 76-89.
[21]
Spatio-temporal differentiation and integration in visual motion perception. Psychological Research. v38. 379-393.
[22]
Kale, A., Cuntoor, N., & Chellappa, R. (2002). A framework for activity-specific human identification. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech, and signal processing (ICASSP '02) Orlando, FL (Vol. 4, pp. IV-3660-IV-3663).
[23]
Back-propagation is sensitive to initial conditions. Complex Systems. v4 i3. 269-280.
[24]
Recognizing the sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display. Perception and Psychophysics. v21 i6. 575-580.
[25]
Laxmi, V., Carter, J. N., & Damper, R. I. (2002a). Biologically-inspired human motion detection. In 10th European symposium on artificial neural networks (ESANN '2002), Bruges, Belgium (pp. 95-100).
[26]
Laxmi, V., Carter, J. N., & Damper, R. I. (2002b). Biologically-inspired human gait classifiers. In Workshop on automatic identification advanced technologies (AutoID'02), Tarrytown, NY (pp. 17-22).
[27]
Lee, L., Dalley, G., & Tieu, K. (2003). Learning pedestrian models for silhouette refinement. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on computer vision, Nice, France (pp. 663-670).
[28]
Gender discrimination in biological motion displays based on dynamic cues. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B). v258 i1353. 273-279.
[29]
Meyer, D. (1997). Human gait classification based on hidden Markov models. In Proceedings of 3D image analysis and synthesis, Erlangen, Germany (pp. 139-146).
[30]
Meyer, D., Pösl, J., & Niemann, H. (1998). Gait classification with HMMs for trajectories of body parts extracted by mixture densities. In Proceedings of British machine vision conference (BMVC'98), Southampton, UK (pp. 459-468).
[31]
Model based image analysis of human motion using constraint propagation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. v2 i6. 522-536.
[32]
Orientation specificity in biological motion perception. Perception and Psychophysics. v62 i5. 889-899.
[33]
Subconfigurations of the human form in the perception of biological motion displays. Acta Psychologica. v102 i2-3. 293-318.
[34]
Estimating the efficiency of recognizing gender and affect from biological motion. Vision Research. v42 i20. 2345-2355.
[35]
Rehg, J. M., & Kanade, T. (1995). Model-based tracking of self-occluding articulated objects. In Proceedings of international conference on computer vision, Cambridge, MA (pp. 612-617).
[36]
Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature. v323 i9. 533-536.
[37]
Parallel networks that learn to pronounce English text. Complex Systems. v1 i1. 145-168.
[38]
Visual analysis of gait as a cue to identity. Applied Cognitive Psychology. v13 i6. 513-526.
[39]
Upside-down presentation of the Johansson moving light-spot pattern. Perception. v13 i3. 283-286.
[40]
Sundaresan, A., Roy Chowdhury, A., & Chellappa, R. (2003). A hidden Markov model based framework for recognition of humans from gait sequences. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on image processing, Barcelona, Spain (Vol. 2, pp. 85-88).
[41]
Decomposing biological motion: a framework for analysis and synthesis of human gait patterns. Journal of Vision. v2 i5. 371-387.
[42]
Tracking of persons in monocular image sequences. Computer Vision and Image Understanding. v74 i3. 174-192.
[43]
Structure from motion of rigid and jointed objects. Artificial Intelligence. v19 i1. 107-130.
[44]
Automatic person recognition by walking and running via model-based approaches. Pattern Recognition. v37 i5. 1057-1072.
  1. Human and machine perception of biological motion

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image Cognitive Systems Research
    Cognitive Systems Research  Volume 7, Issue 4
    December, 2006
    54 pages

    Publisher

    Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

    Netherlands

    Publication History

    Published: 01 December 2006

    Author Tags

    1. Artificial perception
    2. Biological motion
    3. Cognitive modeling
    4. Visual perception

    Qualifiers

    • Article

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 0
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 08 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    View options

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media