Search

We introduce a benchmark to directly evaluate the alignment between human observers and vision models on a 3D shape inference task. We leverage an experimental design from the cognitive sciences which requires zero-shot visual inferences about object shape: given a set of images, participants identify which contain the same/different objects, despite considerable viewpoint variation. We draw from a diverse range of images that include common objects (e.g., chairs) as well as abstract shapes (i.e., procedurally generated `nonsense' objects). After constructing over 2000 unique image sets, we administer these tasks to human participants, collecting 35K trials of behavioral data from over 500 participants. This includes explicit choice behaviors as well as intermediate measures, such as reaction time and gaze data. We then evaluate the performance of common vision models (e.g., DINOv2, MAE, CLIP). We find that humans outperform all models by a wide margin. Using a multi-scale evaluation approach, we identify underlying similarities and differences between models and humans: while human-model performance is correlated, humans allocate more time/processing on challenging trials. All images, data, and code can be accessed via our project page., Comment: Project page: https://tzler.github.io/MOCHI/ Code: https://github.com/tzler/mochi_code Huggingface dataset: https://huggingface.co/datasets/tzler/MOCHI

Humans effortlessly infer the 3D shape of objects. What computations underlie this ability? Although various computational models have been proposed, none of them capture the human ability to match object shape across viewpoints. Here, we ask whether and how this gap might be closed. We begin with a relatively novel class of computational models, 3D neural fields, which encapsulate the basic principles of classic analysis-by-synthesis in a deep neural network (DNN). First, we find that a 3D Light Field Network (3D-LFN) supports 3D matching judgments well aligned to humans for within-category comparisons, adversarially-defined comparisons that accentuate the 3D failure cases of standard DNN models, and adversarially-defined comparisons for algorithmically generated shapes with no category structure. We then investigate the source of the 3D-LFN's ability to achieve human-aligned performance through a series of computational experiments. Exposure to multiple viewpoints of objects during training and a multi-view learning objective are the primary factors behind model-human alignment; even conventional DNN architectures come much closer to human behavior when trained with multi-view objectives. Finally, we find that while the models trained with multi-view learning objectives are able to partially generalize to new object categories, they fall short of human alignment. This work provides a foundation for understanding human shape inferences within neurally mappable computational architectures.