↓ Skip to main content

The effect of multispectral image fusion enhancement on human efficiency

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
The effect of multispectral image fusion enhancement on human efficiency
Published in
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41235-016-0045-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer L. Bittner, M. Trent Schill, Fairul Mohd-Zaid, Leslie M. Blaha

Abstract

The visual system can be highly influenced by changes to visual presentation. Thus, numerous techniques have been developed to augment imagery in an attempt to improve human perception. The current paper examines the potential impact of one such enhancement, multispectral image fusion, where imagery captured in varying spectral bands (e.g., visible, thermal, night vision) is algorithmically combined to produce an output to strengthen visual perception. We employ ideal observer analysis over a series of experimental conditions to (1) establish a framework for testing the impact of image fusion over the varying aspects surrounding its implementation (e.g., stimulus content, task) and (2) examine the effectiveness of fusion on human information processing efficiency in a basic application. We used a set of rotated Landolt C images captured with a number of individual sensor cameras and combined across seven traditional fusion algorithms (e.g., Laplacian pyramid, principal component analysis, averaging) in a 1-of-8 orientation task. We found that, contrary to the idea of fused imagery always producing a greater impact on perception, single-band imagery can be just as influential. Additionally, efficiency data were shown to fluctuate based on sensor combination instead of fusion algorithm, suggesting the need for examining multiple factors to determine the success of image fusion. Our use of ideal observer analysis, a popular technique from the vision sciences, provides not only a standard for testing fusion in direct relation to the visual system but also allows for comparable examination of fusion across its associated problem space of application.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 22%
Researcher 1 11%
Unspecified 1 11%
Student > Postgraduate 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 11%
Computer Science 1 11%
Engineering 1 11%
Unknown 5 56%
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 05 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,418,183
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#302
of 318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,898
of 309,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#11
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 309,710 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.