Neural modeling of flow rendering effectiveness

ABSTRACT

It has been previously proposed that understanding the mechanisms of contour perception can provide a theory for why some flow rendering methods allow for better judgments of advection pathways than others. In the present paper we develop this theory through a numerical model of the primary visual cortex of the brain (Visual Area 1) where contour enhancement is understood to occur according to most neurological theories. We apply a two-stage model of contour perception to various visual representations of flow fields evaluated by Laidlaw et al [2001]. In the first stage, contour enhancement is modeled based on Li's [1998] cortical model. In the second stage, a model of contour integration is proposed designed to support the task of advection path tracing. The model yields insights into the relative strengths of different flow visualization methods for the task of visualizing advection pathways.

References

1. Blake, R. and Holopigan, K. 1985. Orientation of selectivity in cats and humans assessed by masking. Vision Research 23, 1: 1459--1467.
2. Cabral, B., and Ledom, L. 1993. Imaging vector fields using line integral convolution. In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 93, 263--272.
3. Daugman, J. 1985. Uncertainty relation for resolution in space, spatial frequency and orientation optimized by two-dimensional cortical filters. Journal of the Optical Society of America, A/2: 1160--1169.
4. Elder, J.; Krupnik, A.; Johnston, L., 2003. Contour grouping with prior models, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 25, 6, 661--674.
5. Field, D., Hayes, A., and Hess, R. 1993. Contour integration by the human visual system: Evidence for a local "association field". Vision Research 33, 2, 173--193.
6. Hubel, D., and Wiesel, T. 1962. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. J. Physiol., 160, 106--154.
7. Hubel, D., and Wiesel, T. 1968. Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. J. Physiol, 195, 215--243.
8. Janiszewski, C. 1998. The influence of display characteristics on visual search exploratory search behavior. Journal of Consumer Research 25, 290--301.
9. Kirby, R., Marmanis, H., and Laidlaw, D. 1999. Visulizing multivalued data from 2D incompressible flows using concepts from painting. In Proceedings of IEEE Visualization. 333--340.
10. Laidlaw, D., Kirby, R., Davidson, S., Miller, T., Silva, M., Warren, W., and Tarr, M. 2001. Quantitative Comparative Evaluation of 2D Vector Field Visualization Methods. In Proceedings of IEEE Visualization 2001, 143--150
11. Li, Z. 1998. A Neural Model of Contour integration in the primary visual cortex. Neural Computation, 10 903--940.
12. Lund, N. 2001. Attention and Pattern Recognition, Routledge.
13. Singer, W., and Gray, C. 1995. Visual feature integration and the temporal correlation hypothesis. Annu. Rev. Neuroscience, 18, 555--586.
14. Turk, G. and Banks, D. 1996. Image guided streamline placement. In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 96, 453--460.
15. Mostafawy, S. Kermani, O., Lubatschowski, H. 1997. Virtual Eye: Retinal Image Visualization of the Human Eye, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, vol. 17, no. 1, 8--12
16. Ware, C. 2004. Information Visualization: Perception for Design. Morgan Kaufman.
17. Ware, C. 2008. Toward a perceptual theory of flow visualization. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 28(2) 6--11.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing

  • Human computer interaction (HCI)