A Biologically Motivated Scheme for Robust Junction Detection

  • Thorsten Hansen
  • Heiko Neumann
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2525)


Junctions provide important cues in various perceptual tasks, such as the determination of occlusion relationship for figureground separation, transparency perception, and object recognition, among others. In computer vision, junctions are used in a number of tasks like point matching for image tracking or correspondence analysis. We propose a biologically motivated approach to junction detection. The core component is a model of V1 based on biological mechanisms of colinear long-range integration and recurrent interaction. The model V1 interactions generate a robust, coherent representation of contours. Junctions are then implicitly characterized by high activity for multiple orientations within a cortical hypercolumn. A local measure of circular variance is used to extract junction points from this distributed representation. We show for a number of generic junction configurations and various artificial and natural images that junctions can be accurately and robustly detected. In a first set of simulations, we compare the detected junctions based on recurrent long-range responses to junction responses as obtained for a purely feedforward model of complex cells. We show that localization accuracy and positive correctness is improved by recurrent long-range interaction. In a second set of simulations, we compare the new scheme with two widely used junction detection schemes in computer vision, based on Gaussian curvature and the structure tensor. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis is used for a threshold-free evaluation of the different approaches. We show for both artificial and natural images that the new approach performs superior to the standard schemes. Overall we propose that nonlocal interactions as realized by long-range interactions within V1 play an important role for the detection of higher order features such as corners and junctions.


Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve Receiver Operator Characteristic Analysis Complex Cell Natural Image Structure Tensor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adelson, E. H. (200) Lightness perception and lightness illusions. In Gazzaniga, M. S., ed. The New Cognitive Neurosciences, pp. 339–351. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2 edn.Google Scholar
  2. Attneave, F. (1954) Some informational aspects of visual perception. Psychol. Rev., 61(3):183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beaudet, P.R. (1978) Rotationally invariant image operators. In 4th Int. Joint Conf. on Pattern Recognition, pp. 578–583, Kyoto, Japan.Google Scholar
  4. Biederman, I. (1985) Human image understanding: recent research and a theory. Computer Vision, Graphics, Image Proc., 32(1):29–73.Google Scholar
  5. Bosking, W. H., Zhang, Y., Schofield, B., Fitzpatrick, D. (1997) Orientation selectivity and the arrangement of horizontal connections in tree shrew striate cortex. J. Neurosci., 17(6):2112–2127.Google Scholar
  6. Förstner, W. (1986) A feature based correspondence algorithm for image matching. In Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sensing, volume 26, pp. 176–189.Google Scholar
  7. Gilbert, C. D. and Wiesel, T. N. (1983) Clustered intrinsic connections in cat visual cortex. J. Neurosci., 3:1116–1133.Google Scholar
  8. Green, D. M. and Swets, J. A. (1974) Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. Krieger, Huntington, NY, 1974.Google Scholar
  9. Grossberg, S. and Mingolla, E. (1985) Neural dynamics of form perception: boundary completion, illusory figures, and neon color spreading. Psychol. Rev., 92:173–211, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hansen, T. (2002) A neural model of early vision: contrast, contours, corners and surfaces. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. Ulm, Faculty of Computer Science, Dept. of Neural Information Processing. Submitted.Google Scholar
  11. Hansen, T. and Neumann, H. (1999) A model of V1 visual contrast processing utilizing long-range connections and recurrent interactions. In Proc. 9. Int. Conf. on Artificial Neural Networks (ICANN99), pp. 61–66, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
  12. Hansen, T. and Neumann, H. (2001) Neural mechanisms for representing surface and contour features. In Stefan Wermter, Jim Austin, and David Willshaw, editors, Emergent Neural Computational Architectures Based on Neuroscience, LNCS/LNAI 2036, pp. 139–153. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris, C. J. (1987) Determination of ego-motion from matched points. In Proc. Alvey Vision Conference, pp. 189–192, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  14. Hirsch, J.A. and Gilbert, C.D. (1991) Synaptic physiology of horizontal connections in the cat’s visual cortex. J. Neurosci., 11(6):1800–1809.Google Scholar
  15. Hubel, D. H. and Wiesel, T. N. (1968) Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. J. Physiol., 195:215–243.Google Scholar
  16. Huffman, D. A. (1971) Impossible objects as nonsense sentences. In B. Meltzer and D. Michic, editors, Machine Intelligence 6, pp. 295–323. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  17. Hupé, J.M., James, A.C., Payne, B.R., Lomber, S.G., Girard, P. and Bullier, J.(1998) Cortical feedback improves discrimination between figure and background by V1, V2 and V3 neurons. Nature, 394:784–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lindeberg, T. (1998) Feature detection with automatic scale selection. Int. J. Comput. Vision, 30(2):77–116.Google Scholar
  19. McDermott, J.H. (2001) Some experiments on junctions in real images. Master’s thesis, University Colledge London, 2001. Online available from∼jmcderm.
  20. Metelli, F. (1974) The perception of transparency. Sci. Am., 230(4):90–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mokhtarian, F. and Suomela, R. (1998) Robust image corner detection through curvature scale space. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 20(12):1376–1381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nitzberg, M. and Shiota, T. (1992) Nonlinear image filtering with edge and corner enhancement. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 14:826–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pasupathy, A. and Connor, C. E. (2001) Shape representation in area V4: positionspecific tuning for boundary conformation. J. Neurophysiol., 86(5):2505–2519.Google Scholar
  24. Rockland, K. S. and Lund, J. S. (1983) Intrinsic laminar lattice connections in primate visual cortex. J. Comp. Neurol., 216:303–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rubin, N. (2001) The role of junctions in surface completion and contour matching. Perception, 30(3):339–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Smith, S. and Brady, J. (1997) SUSAN—a new approach to low level image processing. Int. J. Comput. Vision, 23(1):45–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zetzsche, C. and Barth, E. (1990) Fundamental limits of linear filters in the visual processing of two-dimensional signals. Vision Res., 30(7):1111–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zucker, S. W., Dobbins, A. and Iverson, L. A. (1989) Two stages of curve detection suggest two styles of visual computation. Neural Comput., 1:68–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thorsten Hansen
    • 1
  • Heiko Neumann
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Neural Information ProcessingUniv. UlmUlmGermany

Personalised recommendations