The properties of the motion-detecting mechanisms mediating perceived direction in stochastic displays

AbstractPrevious studies [e.g. Baker & Hess, 1998. Vision Research, 38, 1211–1222] have shown that perceived direction in displays composed of multiple, limited-lifetime, Gabor micropatterns (G) is influenced by movement both at the fine spatial scale of the internal luminance modulation (first-order motion) and the coarse spatial scale of the Gaussian, contrast window (second-order motion). However it is presently indeterminate as to whether this pattern of results is indicative of the processes by which first-order and second-order motion signals interact within the visual system per se or those by which motion information, irrespective of how it is defined, is utilised across different spatial scales. To address this issue, and more generally the properties of the mechanisms that analyse motion in such displays, we employed stochastic motion sequences composed of either G, G added to a static carrier (G+C) or G multiplied with a carrier (G*C). Crucially G*C, unlike both G and G+C, micropatterns contain no net first-order motion and second-order motion only at the scale of the internal contrast modulation. For small displacements perceived direction in all cases showed a dependence on the internal sinusoidal spatial structure of the micropatterns and characteristic oscillations were typically observed, consistent with models in which first-order motion and second-order motion are encoded on the basis of similar low-level mechanisms. Importantly for larger displacements, and also when the internal spatial structure was randomised on successive exposures (so that motion at this spatial scale was unreliable), performance tended to be veridical for all types of micropattern, even though under these conditions displacements of the G*C micropatterns should have been invisible to current, low-level, motion-detecting schemes. This suggests that both low-level motion sensors and mechanisms utilising a different motion-detecting strategy such as high-level, attentive, feature-tracking may mediate perceptual judgements in stochastic displays

Steady and unsteady transonic pressure measurements on a clipped delta wing for pitching and control-surface oscillations

Steady and unsteady pressures were measured on a clipped delta wing with a 6-percent circular-arc airfoil section and a leading-edge sweep angle of 50.40 deg. The model was oscillated in pitch and had an oscillating trailing-edge control surface. Measurements were concentrated over a Mach number range from 0.88 to 0.94; less extensive measurements were made at Mach numbers of 0.40, 0.96, and 1.12. The Reynolds number based on mean chord was approximately 10 x 10 to the 6th power. The interaction of wing or control-surface deflection with the formation of shock waves and with a leading-edge vortex generated complex pressure distributions that were sensitive to frequency and to small changes in Mach number at transonic speeds

Low spatial frequencies are suppressively masked across spatial scale, orientation, field position, and eye of origin

Masking is said to occur when a mask stimulus interferes with the visibility of a target (test) stimulus. One widely held view of this process supposes interactions between mask and test mechanisms (cross-channel masking), and explicit models (e.g., J. M. Foley, 1994) have proposed that the interactions are inhibitory. Unlike a within-channel model, where masking involves the combination of mask and test stimulus within a single mechanism, this cross-channel inhibitory model predicts that the mask should attenuate the perceived contrast of a test stimulus. Another possibility is that masking is due to an increase in noise, in which case, perception of contrast should be unaffected once the signal exceeds detection threshold. We use circular patches and annuli of sine-wave grating in contrast detection and contrast matching experiments to test these hypotheses and investigate interactions across spatial frequency, orientation, field position, and eye of origin. In both types of experiments we found substantial effects of masking that can occur over a factor of 3 in spatial frequency, 45° in orientation, across different field positions and between different eyes. We found the effects to be greatest at the lowest test spatial frequency we used (0.46 c/deg), and when the mask and test differed in all four dimensions simultaneously. This is surprising in light of previous work where it was concluded that suppression from the surround was strictly monocular (C. Chubb, G. Sperling, & J. A. Solomon, 1989). The results confirm that above detection threshold, cross-channel masking involves contrast suppression and not (purely) mask-induced noise. We conclude that cross-channel masking can be a powerful phenomenon, particularly at low test spatial frequencies and when mask and test are presented to different eyes. © 2004 ARVO

Collinear facilitation: Effect of additive and multiplicative external noise

AbstractThe detectability of a Gabor patch is improved by the presence of collinear flanking Gabors, this phenomenon is termed collinear facilitation. In experiment 1, we investigate the effects of adding 2D spatial luminance noise as a means of investigating different transects through the suprathreshold contrast space to see whether facilitation is ubiquitous throughout the contrast domain or whether it is confined to absolute contrast threshold. The results show that adding luminance noise abolishes the facilitation, showing it is confined to absolute threshold. In experiment 2, we assess whether 2nd order stimuli exhibit collinear facilitation and whether 1st order flanks can induce facilitation in 2nd order stimuli and vice versa. Our results suggest that collinear facilitation, albeit weaker, does occur for some 2nd order stimuli but we did not find any 1st/2nd order interactions, suggesting separate 1st/2nd order cortical processing streams, at least at the level at which this phenomenon occurs. Our two main findings, namely the lack of facilitation at suprathreshold contrasts and its presence for 2nd order processing argue against it playing a pivotal role in contour integration which does occur at all contrasts but not for these 2nd order stimuli

When stereopsis does not improve with increasing contrast1Portions of this work were presented at The European Conference on Visual Perception, Helsinki, 1997.1

AbstractIt is well known that stereoacuity for conventional (1st-order) stimuli improves with increasing contrast with an approximate slope of −0.5 on log–log axes (Halpern DL, Blake RR. Perception 1988;17:483–495; Legge GE, Gu Y. Vis Res 1989;29:989–1004). In the experiments reported here a variety of stimuli were used (Gabor patches, amplitude modulated stimuli and 1D noise patches) and tasks (stereoacuity and Dmax) to determine if 2nd-order stereopsis shows a similar square root dependence. The results consistently demonstrate that the effect of contrast on stereopsis is quite different for the 2nd-order stimuli. Increases in stimulus contrast have little effect on performance; the resulting slopes are very shallow. The pattern of results is similar when the interocular contrast ratio is varied, demonstrating that 2nd-order processing is more resilient to stimulus differences in the two eyes than 1st-order

Rare isotope studies involving catalytic oxidation of CO over platinum-tin oxide

Results of studies utilizing normal and rare oxygen isotopes in the catalytic oxidation of carbon monoxide over a platinum-tin oxide catalyst substrate are presented. Chemisorption of labeled carbon monoxide on the catalyst followed by thermal desorption yielded a carbon dioxide product with an oxygen-18 composition consistent with the formation of a carbonate-like intermediate in the chemisorption process. The efficacy of a method developed for the oxygen-18 labeling of the platinum-tin oxide catalyst surface for use in closed cycle pulsed care isotope carbon dioxide lasers is demonstrated for the equivalent of 10 to the 6th power pulses at 10 pulses per second

Binocular vision in amblyopia : structure, suppression and plasticity

The amblyopic visual system was once considered to be structurally monocular. However, it now evident that the capacity for binocular vision is present in many observers with amblyopia. This has led to new techniques for quantifying suppression that have provided insights into the relationship between suppression and the monocular and binocular visual deficits experienced by amblyopes. Furthermore, new treatments are emerging that directly target suppressive interactions within the visual cortex and, on the basis of initial data, appear to improve both binocular and monocular visual function, even in adults with amblyopia. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of recent studies that have investigated the structure, measurement and treatment of binocular vision in observers with strabismic, anisometropic and mixed amblyopia

Poor encoding of position by contrast-defined motion

Second-order (contrast-defined) motion stimuli lead to poor performance on a number of tasks, including discriminating form from motion and visual search. To investigate this deficiency, we tested the ability of human observers to monitor multiple regions for motion, to code the relative positions of shapes defined by motion, and to simultaneously encode motion direction and location. Performance with shapes from contrast-defined motion was compared with that obtained from luminance-defined (first-order) stimuli. When the position of coherent motion was uncertain, direction-discrimination thresholds were elevated similarly for both luminance-defined and contrast-defined motion, compared to when the stimulus location was known. The motion of both luminance- and contrast-defined structure can be monitored in multiple visual field locations. Only under conditions that greatly advantaged contrast-defined motion, were observers able to discriminate the positional offset of shapes defined by either type of motion. When shapes from contrast-defined and luminance-defined motion were presented under comparable conditions, the positional accuracy of contrast-defined motion was found to be poorer than its luminance-defined counterpart. These results may explain some, but possibly not all, of the deficits found previously with second-order motion

Linear binocular combination of responses to contrast modulation:contrast-weighted summation in first- and second-order vision

Binocular combination for first-order (luminancedefined) stimuli has been widely studied, but we know rather little about this binocular process for spatial modulations of contrast (second-order stimuli). We used phase-matching and amplitude-matching tasks to assess binocular combination of second-order phase and modulation depth simultaneously. With fixed modulation in one eye, we found that binocularly perceived phase was shifted, and perceived amplitude increased almost linearly as modulation depth in the other eye increased. At larger disparities, the phase shift was larger and the amplitude change was smaller. The degree of interocular correlation of the carriers had no influence. These results can be explained by an initial extraction of the contrast envelopes before binocular combination (consistent with the lack of dependence on carrier correlation) followed by a weighted linear summation of second-order modulations in which the weights (gains) for each eye are driven by the first-order carrier contrasts as previously found for first-order binocular combination. Perceived modulation depth fell markedly with increasing phase disparity unlike previous findings that perceived first-order contrast was almost independent of phase disparity. We present a simple revision to a widely used interocular gain-control theory that unifies first- and second-order binocular summation with a single principle-contrast-weighted summation-and we further elaborate the model for first-order combination. Conclusion: Second-order combination is controlled by first-order contrast

Direction discrimination thresholds in binocular, monocular, and dichoptic viewing:motion opponency and contrast gain control

We studied the binocular organization of motion opponency and its relationship to contrast gain control. Luminance contrast thresholds for discriminating direction of motion were measured for drifting Gabor patterns (target) presented on counterphase flickering Gabor patterns (pedestal). There were four presentation conditions: binocular, monocular, dichoptic, and halfbinocular. For the half-binocular presentation, the target was presented to one eye while pedestals were presented to both eyes. In addition, to test for motion opponency, we studied two increment and decrement conditions, in which the target increased contrast for one direction of movement but decreased it for the opposite moving component of the pedestal. Threshold versus pedestal contrast functions showed a dipper shape, and there was a strong interaction between pedestal contrast and test condition. Binocular thresholds were lower than monocular thresholds but only at low pedestal contrasts. Monocular and half-binocular thresholds were similar at low pedestal contrasts, but half-binocular thresholds became higher and closer to dichoptic thresholds as pedestal contrast increased. Adding the decremental target reduced thresholds by a factor of two or more-a strong sign of opponency- when the decrement was in the same eye as the increment or the opposite eye. We compared several computational models fitted to the data. Converging evidence from the present and previous studies (Gorea, Conway, & Blake, 2001) suggests that motion opponency is most likely to be monocular, occurring before direction-specific binocular summation and before divisive, binocular gain control