Relational color constancy in achromatic and isoluminant images

Relational color constancy, which refers to the constancy of perceived relations between surface colors under changes in illuminant, may be based on the computation of spatial ratios of cone excitations. As this activity need occur only within rather than between cone pathways, relational color constancy might be assumed to be based on relative luminance processing. This hypothesis was tested in a psychophysical experiment in which observers viewed simulated images of Mondrian patterns undergoing colorimetric changes that could be attributed either to an illuminant change or to a nonilluminant change; the images were isoluminant, achromatic, or unmodified. Observers reliably discriminated the two types of changes in all three conditions, implying that relational color constancy is not based on luminance cues alone. A computer simulation showed that in these isoluminant and achromatic images spatial ratios of cone excitations and of combinations of cone excitations were almost invariant under illuminant changes and that discrimination performance could be predicted from deviations in these ratios.Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC

Shading Beats Binocular Disparity in Depth from Luminance Gradients: Evidence against a Maximum Likelihood Principle for Cue Combination

Perceived depth is conveyed by multiple cues, including binocular disparity and luminance shading. Depth perception from luminance shading information depends on the perceptual assumption for the incident light, which has been shown to default to a diffuse illumination assumption. We focus on the case of sinusoidally corrugated surfaces to ask how shading and disparity cues combine defined by the joint luminance gradients and intrinsic disparity modulation that would occur in viewing the physical corrugation of a uniform surface under diffuse illumination. Such surfaces were simulated with a sinusoidal luminance modulation (0.26 or 1.8 cy/deg, contrast 20%-80%) modulated either in-phase or in opposite phase with a sinusoidal disparity of the same corrugation frequency, with disparity amplitudes ranging from 0’-20’. The observers’ task was to adjust the binocular disparity of a comparison random-dot stereogram surface to match the perceived depth of the joint luminance/disparitymodulated corrugation target. Regardless of target spatial frequency, the perceived target depth increased with the luminance contrast and depended on luminance phase but was largely unaffected by the luminance disparity modulation. These results validate the idea that human observers can use the diffuse illumination assumption to perceive depth from luminance gradients alone without making an assumption of light direction. For depth judgments with combined cues, the observers gave much greater weighting to the luminance shading than to the disparity modulation of the targets. The results were not well-fit by a Bayesian cue-combination model weighted in proportion to the variance of the measurements for each cue in isolation. Instead, they suggest that the visual system uses disjunctive mechanisms to process these two types of information rather than combining them according to their likelihood ratios

Confusion and dependence in uses of history

Many people argue that history makes a special difference to the subjects of biology and psychology, and that history does not make this special difference to other parts of the world. This paper will show that historical properties make no more or less of a difference to biology or psychology than to chemistry, physics, or other sciences. Although historical properties indeed make a certain kind of difference to biology and psychology, this paper will show that historical properties make the same kind of difference to geology, sociology, astronomy, and other sciences. Similarly, many people argue that nonhistorical properties make a special difference to the nonbiological and the nonpsychological world. This paper will show that nonhistorical properties make the same difference to all things in the world when it comes to their causal behavior and that historical properties make the same difference to all things in the world when it comes to their distributions. Although history is special, it is special in the same way to all parts of the worl