This paper proposes a novel method for understanding daily hand-object manipulation by developing computer vision-based techniques. Specifically, we focus on recognizing hand grasp types, object attributes and manipulation actions within an unified framework by exploring their contextual relationships. Our hypothesis is that it is necessary to jointly model hands, objects and actions in order to accurately recognize multiple tasks that are correlated to each other in hand-object manipulation. In the proposed model, we explore various semantic relationships between actions, grasp types and object attributes, and show how the context can be used to boost the recognition of each component. We also explore the spatial relationship between the hand and object in order to detect the manipulated object from hand in cluttered environment. Experiment results on all three recognition tasks show that our proposed method outperforms traditional appearance-based methods which are not designed to take into account contextual relationships involved in hand-object manipulation. The visualization and generalizability study of the learned context further supports our hypothesis.
Our goal is to automate the understanding of natural hand-object manipulation by developing computer visionbased techniques. Our hypothesis is that it is necessary to model the grasp types of hands and the attributes of manipulated objects in order to accurately recognize manipulation actions. Specifically, we focus on recognizing hand grasp types, object attributes and actions from a single image within an unified model. First, we explore the contextual relationship between grasp types and object attributes, and show how that context can be used to boost the recognition of both grasp types and object attributes. Second, we propose to model actions with grasp types and object attributes based on the hypothesis that grasp types and object attributes contain complementary information for characterizing different actions. Our proposed action model outperforms traditional appearance-based models which are not designed to take into account semantic constraints such as grasp types or object attributes. Experiment results on public egocentric activities datasets strongly support our hypothesis. This paper is the first of a two-part series analyzing human grasping behavior during a wide range of unstructured tasks. The results help clarify overall characteristics of human hand to inform many domains, such as the design of robotic manipulators, targeting rehabilitation toward important hand functionality, and designing haptic devices for use by the hand. It investigates the properties of objects grasped by two housekeepers and two machinists during the course of almost 10,000 grasp instances and correlates the grasp types used to the properties of the object. We establish an object classification that assigns each object properties from a set of seven classes, including mass, shape and size of the grasp location, grasped dimension, rigidity, and roundness. The results showed that 55 percent of grasped objects had at least one dimension larger than 15 cm, suggesting that more than half of objects cannot physically be grasped using their largest axis. Ninety-two percent of objects had a mass of 500 g or less, implying that a high payload capacity may be unnecessary to accomplish a large subset of human grasping behavior. In terms of grasps, 96 percent of grasp locations were 7 cm or less in width, which can help to define requirements for hand rehabilitation and defines a reasonable grasp aperture size for a robotic hand. Subjects grasped the smallest overall major dimension of the object in 94 percent of the instances. This suggests that grasping the smallest axis of an object could be a reliable default behavior to implement in grasp planners.  Our two experiments investigated associations between cognitive representations of objects and hand-shape categories. Hand configurations were partitioned according to prehensility and the size of the contacting surface, resulting in the classes: pinch, poke, palm, and clench. Experiment 1 elicited object names in response to configuration-name cues, provided ratings of the relevance of each configuration to a set of objects, and probed for the functions determining such relevance. Cueing with a configuration class elicited an associated object category with substantial intersubject agreement, and vice versa. Both the object categories and the functions associated with the four hand-configuration classes differed substantially, although the same object could be associated to some extent with multiple configurations, given variations in function. Experiment 2 elicited the names of hand-configuration classes in response to unfamiliar forms, which varied systematically in depth and the size of the projecting...