View specific generalisation effects in face recognition: Front and yaw comparison views are better than pitch

Simone Favelle and Stephen Palmisano

PLOS ONE, 2018, vol. 13, issue 12, 1-21

Abstract: It can be difficult to recognise new instances of an unfamiliar face. Recognition errors in this particular situation appear to be viewpoint dependent with error rates increasing with the angular distance between the face views. Studies using front views for comparison have shown that recognising faces rotated in yaw can be difficult and that recognition of faces rotated in pitch is more challenging still. Here we investigate the extent to which viewpoint dependent face recognition depends on the comparison view. Participants were assigned to one of four different comparison view groups: front, ¾ yaw (right), ¾ pitch-up (above) or ¾ pitch-down (below). On each trial, participants matched their particular comparison view to a range of yaw or pitch rotated test views. Results showed that groups with a front or ¾ yaw comparison view had superior overall performance and more successful generalisation to a broader range of both pitch and yaw test views compared to groups with pitch-up or pitch-down comparison views, both of which had a very restricted generalisation range. Regression analyses revealed the importance of image similarity between views for generalisation, with a lesser role for 3D face depth. These findings are consistent with a view interpolation solution to view generalisation of face recognition, with front and ¾ yaw views being most informative.

Date: 2018
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0209927 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 09927&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0209927

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209927

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().