Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 186

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The visual ambiguity of a moving plane

Longuet-Higgins, Hugh Christopher·1984·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences

Abstract

It is shown that the optic flow field arising from motion relative to a visually textured plane may be characterized by eight parameters that depend on the observer’s linear and angular velocity and the coordinate vector of the plane. These three vectors are not, however, uniquely determined by the values of the eight parameters. First, the optic flow field does not supply independent values for the observer’s speed and distance from the plane; it only gives the ratio of these two quantities. But more unexpectedly, the equations relating the observer’s linear velocity and the plane’s coordinate vector to the eight parameters are still satisfied if the two vectors are interchanged or reversed in direction, or both. So in addition to the veridical interpretation of the optic flow field there exist three spurious interpretations to be considered and if possible excluded. This purpose is served by the condition that an interpretation can be seriously entertained only if it attributes every image element to a light source in the observer’s field of view. This condition immediately eliminates one of the spurious interpretations, and exhibits the other two as mutually inconsistent: one of them is tenable only if all the visible sources lie on the forward half of the plane (relative to the observer’s linear velocity); the other only if they all lie on the backward half-plane. If the sources are distributed over both halves of the plane, only the veridical interpretation survives. Its computation involves solving a 3 x 3 eigenvalue problem derived from the flow field. If the upper two eigenvalues coincide, the observer must be moving directly towards the plane; if the lower two eigenvalues coincide, his motion must be directly away from it; in both cases the spurious interpretation merges with the veridical one. If all three eigenvalues are equal, it may be inferred that either the observer’s linear velocity vanishes or the plane is infinitely distant.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.1984.0088

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 186

Metadata

Authors
Longuet-Higgins, H. C.
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences
Published
1984-12-22
Volume
223
Issue
1231
Pages
165-175
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 2053-9193
OpenAlex
W2130631517
Cited by
186
References
0
FWCI
4.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The visual ambiguity of a moving plane. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.1984.0088
The paper
Longuet-Higgins, H. C. (1984). The visual ambiguity of a moving plane. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1984.0088

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.