A profile of low vision services in England the Low Vision Service Model Evaluation (LOVSME) project

In the UK, low vision rehabilitation is delivered by a wide variety of providers with different strategies being used to integrate services from health, social care and the voluntary sector. In order to capture the current diversity of service provision the Low vision Service Model Evaluation (LOVSME) project aimed to profile selected low vision services using published standards for service delivery as a guide. Seven geographically and organizationally varied low-vision services across England were chosen for their diversity and all agreed to participate. A series of questionnaires and follow-up visits were undertaken to obtain a comprehensive description of each service, including the staff workloads and the cost of providing the service. In this paper the strengths of each model of delivery are discussed, and examples of good practice identified. As a result of the project, an Assessment Framework tool has been developed that aims to help other service providers evaluate different aspects of their own service to identify any gaps in existing service provision, and will act as a benchmark for future service development.

Surface roughness after excimer laser ablation using a PMMA model:profilometry and effects on vision

PURPOSE: To show that the limited quality of surfaces produced by one model of excimer laser systems can degrade visual performance with a polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) model. METHODS: A range of lenses of different powers was ablated in PMMA sheets using five DOS-based Nidek EC-5000 laser systems (Nidek Technologies, Gamagori, Japan) from different clinics. Surface quality was objectively assessed using profilometry. Contrast sensitivity and visual acuity were measured through the lenses when their powers were neutralized with suitable spectacle trial lenses. RESULTS: Average surface roughness was found to increase with lens power, roughness values being higher for negative lenses than for positive lenses. Losses in visual contrast sensitivity and acuity measured in two subjects were found to follow a similar pattern. Findings are similar to those previously published with other excimer laser systems. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of surface roughness produced by some laser systems may be sufficient to degrade visual performance under some circumstances.

Contrast and lustre:a model that accounts for eleven different forms of contrast discrimination in binocular vision

Our goal here is a more complete understanding of how information about luminance contrast is encoded and used by the binocular visual system. In two-interval forced-choice experiments we assessed observers' ability to discriminate changes in contrast that could be an increase or decrease of contrast in one or both eyes, or an increase in one eye coupled with a decrease in the other (termed IncDec). The base or pedestal contrasts were either in-phase or out-of-phase in the two eyes. The opposed changes in the IncDec condition did not cancel each other out, implying that along with binocular summation, information is also available from mechanisms that do not sum the two eyes' inputs. These might be monocular mechanisms. With a binocular pedestal, monocular increments of contrast were much easier to see than monocular decrements. These findings suggest that there are separate binocular (B) and monocular (L,R) channels, but only the largest of the three responses, max(L,B,R), is available to perception and decision. Results from contrast discrimination and contrast matching tasks were described very accurately by this model. Stimuli, data, and model responses can all be visualized in a common binocular contrast space, allowing a more direct comparison between models and data. Some results with out-of-phase pedestals were not accounted for by the max model of contrast coding, but were well explained by an extended model in which gratings of opposite polarity create the sensation of lustre. Observers can discriminate changes in lustre alongside changes in contrast.

Binocular contrast vision at and above threshold

A fundamental problem for any visual system with binocular overlap is the combination of information from the two eyes. Electrophysiology shows that binocular integration of luminance contrast occurs early in visual cortex, but a specific systems architecture has not been established for human vision. Here, we address this by performing binocular summation and monocular, binocular, and dichoptic masking experiments for horizontal 1 cycle per degree test and masking gratings. These data reject three previously published proposals, each of which predict too little binocular summation and insufficient dichoptic facilitation. However, a simple development of one of the rejected models (the twin summation model) and a completely new model (the two-stage model) provide very good fits to the data. Two features common to both models are gently accelerating (almost linear) contrast transduction prior to binocular summation and suppressive ocular interactions that contribute to contrast gain control. With all model parameters fixed, both models correctly predict (1) systematic variation in psychometric slopes, (2) dichoptic contrast matching, and (3) high levels of binocular summation for various levels of binocular pedestal contrast. A review of evidence from elsewhere leads us to favor the two-stage model. © 2006 ARVO.

Binocular interaction:Contrast matching and contrast discrimination are predicted by the same model

How do signals from the 2 eyes combine and interact? Our recent work has challenged earlier schemes in which monocular contrast signals are subject to square-law transduction followed by summation across eyes and binocular gain control. Much more successful was a new 'two-stage' model in which the initial transducer was almost linear and contrast gain control occurred both pre- and post-binocular summation. Here we extend that work by: (i) exploring the two-dimensional stimulus space (defined by left- and right-eye contrasts) more thoroughly, and (ii) performing contrast discrimination and contrast matching tasks for the same stimuli. Twenty-five base-stimuli made from 1 c/deg patches of horizontal grating, were defined by the factorial combination of 5 contrasts for the left eye (0.3-32%) with five contrasts for the right eye (0.3-32%). Other than in contrast, the gratings in the two eyes were identical. In a 2IFC discrimination task, the base-stimuli were masks (pedestals), where the contrast increment was presented to one eye only. In a matching task, the base-stimuli were standards to which observers matched the contrast of either a monocular or binocular test grating. In the model, discrimination depends on the local gradient of the observer's internal contrast-response function, while matching equates the magnitude (rather than gradient) of response to the test and standard. With all model parameters fixed by previous work, the two-stage model successfully predicted both the discrimination and the matching data and was much more successful than linear or quadratic binocular summation models. These results show that performance measures and perception (contrast discrimination and contrast matching) can be understood in the same theoretical framework for binocular contrast vision. © 2007 VSP.

Interocular suppression and contrast gain control in human vision

The human visual system combines contrast information from the two eyes to produce a single cyclopean representation of the external world. This task requires both summation of congruent images and inhibition of incongruent images across the eyes. These processes were explored psychophysically using narrowband sinusoidal grating stimuli. Initial experiments focussed on binocular interactions within a single detecting mechanism, using contrast discrimination and contrast matching tasks. Consistent with previous findings, dichoptic presentation produced greater masking than monocular or binocular presentation. Four computational models were compared, two of which performed well on all data sets. Suppression between mechanisms was then investigated, using orthogonal and oblique stimuli. Two distinct suppressive pathways were identified, corresponding to monocular and dichoptic presentation. Both pathways impact prior to binocular summation of signals, and differ in their strengths, tuning, and response to adaptation, consistent with recent single-cell findings in cat. Strikingly, the magnitude of dichoptic masking was found to be spatiotemporally scale invariant, whereas monocular masking was dependent on stimulus speed. Interocular suppression was further explored using a novel manipulation, whereby stimuli were presented in dichoptic antiphase. Consistent with the predictions of a computational model, this produced weaker masking than in-phase presentation. This allowed the bandwidths of suppression to be measured without the complicating factor of additive combination of mask and test. Finally, contrast vision in strabismic amblyopia was investigated. Although amblyopes are generally believed to have impaired binocular vision, binocular summation was shown to be intact when stimuli were normalized for interocular sensitivity differences. An alternative account of amblyopia was developed, in which signals in the affected eye are subject to attenuation and additive noise prior to binocular combination.

Blur adaptation explained by a norm-based model of contrast adaptation

Adapting to blurred images makes in-focus images look too sharp, and vice-versa (Webster et al, 2002 Nature Neuroscience 5 839 - 840). We asked how such blur adaptation is related to contrast adaptation. Georgeson (1985 Spatial Vision 1 103 - 112) found that grating contrast adaptation followed a subtractive rule: perceived (matched) contrast of a grating was fairly well predicted by subtracting some fraction k(~0.3) of the adapting contrast from the test contrast. Here we apply that rule to the responses of a set of spatial filters at different scales and orientations. Blur is encoded by the pattern of filter response magnitudes over scale. We tested two versions - the 'norm model' and 'fatigue model' - against blur-matching data obtained after adaptation to sharpened, in-focus or blurred images. In the fatigue model, filter responses are simply reduced by exposure to the adapter. In the norm model, (a) the visual system is pre-adapted to a focused world and (b) discrepancy between observed and expected responses to the experimental adapter leads to additional reduction (or enhancement) of filter responses during experimental adaptation. The two models are closely related, but only the norm model gave a satisfactory account of results across the four experiments analysed, with one free parameter k. This model implies that the visual system is pre-adapted to focused images, that adapting to in-focus or blank images produces no change in adaptation, and that adapting to sharpened or blurred images changes the state of adaptation, leading to changes in perceived blur or sharpness.

Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision

Over the last ten years our understanding of early spatial vision has improved enormously. The long-standing model of probability summation amongst multiple independent mechanisms with static output nonlinearities responsible for masking is obsolete. It has been replaced by a much more complex network of additive, suppressive, and facilitatory interactions and nonlinearities across eyes, area, spatial frequency, and orientation that extend well beyond the classical recep-tive field (CRF). A review of a substantial body of psychophysical work performed by ourselves (20 papers), and others, leads us to the following tentative account of the processing path for signal contrast. The first suppression stage is monocular, isotropic, non-adaptable, accelerates with RMS contrast, most potent for low spatial and high temporal frequencies, and extends slightly beyond the CRF. Second and third stages of suppression are difficult to disentangle but are possibly pre- and post-binocular summation, and involve components that are scale invariant, isotropic, anisotropic, chromatic, achromatic, adaptable, interocular, substantially larger than the CRF, and saturated by contrast. The monocular excitatory pathways begin with half-wave rectification, followed by a preliminary stage of half-binocular summation, a square-law transducer, full binocular summation, pooling over phase, cross-mechanism facilitatory interactions, additive noise, linear summation over area, and a slightly uncertain decision-maker. The purpose of each of these interactions is far from clear, but the system benefits from area and binocular summation of weak contrast signals as well as area and ocularity invariances above threshold (a herd of zebras doesn't change its contrast when it increases in number or when you close one eye). One of many remaining challenges is to determine the stage or stages of spatial tuning in the excitatory pathway.

From filters to features:Scale-space analysis of edge and blur coding in human vision

To make vision possible, the visual nervous system must represent the most informative features in the light pattern captured by the eye. Here we use Gaussian scale-space theory to derive a multiscale model for edge analysis and we test it in perceptual experiments. At all scales there are two stages of spatial filtering. An odd-symmetric, Gaussian first derivative filter provides the input to a Gaussian second derivative filter. Crucially, the output at each stage is half-wave rectified before feeding forward to the next. This creates nonlinear channels selectively responsive to one edge polarity while suppressing spurious or "phantom" edges. The two stages have properties analogous to simple and complex cells in the visual cortex. Edges are found as peaks in a scale-space response map that is the output of the second stage. The position and scale of the peak response identify the location and blur of the edge. The model predicts remarkably accurately our results on human perception of edge location and blur for a wide range of luminance profiles, including the surprising finding that blurred edges look sharper when their length is made shorter. The model enhances our understanding of early vision by integrating computational, physiological, and psychophysical approaches. © ARVO.

Mach edges: a critical test of the nonlinear 3rd derivative model for edge-detection

Feature detection is a crucial stage of visual processing. In previous feature-marking experiments we found that peaks in the 3rd derivative of the luminance profile can signify edges where there are no 1st derivative peaks nor 2nd derivative zero-crossings (Wallis and George 'Mach edges' (the edges of Mach bands) were nicely predicted by a new nonlinear model based on 3rd derivative filtering. As a critical test of the model, we now use a new class of stimuli, formed by adding a linear luminance ramp to the blurred triangle waves used previously. The ramp has no effect on the second or higher derivatives, but the nonlinear model predicts a shift from seeing two edges to seeing only one edge as the added ramp gradient increases. In experiment 1, subjects judged whether one or two edges were visible on each trial. In experiment 2, subjects used a cursor to mark perceived edges and bars. The position and polarity of the marked edges were close to model predictions. Both experiments produced the predicted shift from two to one Mach edge, but the shift was less complete than predicted. We conclude that the model is a useful predictor of edge perception, but needs some modification.

Third-derivative filters predict edge locations in spatial vision

Edge detection is crucial in visual processing. Previous computational and psychophysical models have often used peaks in the gradient or zero-crossings in the 2nd derivative to signal edges. We tested these approaches using a stimulus that has no such features. Its luminance profile was a triangle wave, blurred by a rectangular function. Subjects marked the position and polarity of perceived edges. For all blur widths tested, observers marked edges at or near 3rd derivative maxima, even though these were not 1st derivative maxima or 2nd derivative zero-crossings, at any scale. These results are predicted by a new nonlinear model based on 3rd derivative filtering. As a critical test, we added a ramp of variable slope to the blurred triangle-wave luminance profile. The ramp has no effect on the (linear) 2nd or higher derivatives, but the nonlinear model predicts a shift from seeing two edges to seeing one edge as the ramp gradient increases. Results of two experiments confirmed such a shift, thus supporting the new model. [Supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council].

Blurred edges look faint, and faint edges look sharp:The effect of a gradient threshold in a multi-scale edge coding model

A multi-scale model of edge coding based on normalized Gaussian derivative filters successfully predicts perceived scale (blur) for a wide variety of edge profiles [Georgeson, M. A., May, K. A., Freeman, T. C. A., & Hesse, G. S. (in press). From filters to features: Scale-space analysis of edge and blur coding in human vision. Journal of Vision]. Our model spatially differentiates the luminance profile, half-wave rectifies the 1st derivative, and then differentiates twice more, to give the 3rd derivative of all regions with a positive gradient. This process is implemented by a set of Gaussian derivative filters with a range of scales. Peaks in the inverted normalized 3rd derivative across space and scale indicate the positions and scales of the edges. The edge contrast can be estimated from the height of the peak. The model provides a veridical estimate of the scale and contrast of edges that have a Gaussian integral profile. Therefore, since scale and contrast are independent stimulus parameters, the model predicts that the perceived value of either of these parameters should be unaffected by changes in the other. This prediction was found to be incorrect: reducing the contrast of an edge made it look sharper, and increasing its scale led to a decrease in the perceived contrast. Our model can account for these effects when the simple half-wave rectifier after the 1st derivative is replaced by a smoothed threshold function described by two parameters. For each subject, one pair of parameters provided a satisfactory fit to the data from all the experiments presented here and in the accompanying paper [May, K. A. & Georgeson, M. A. (2007). Added luminance ramp alters perceived edge blur and contrast: A critical test for derivative-based models of edge coding. Vision Research, 47, 1721-1731]. Thus, when we allow for the visual system's insensitivity to very shallow luminance gradients, our multi-scale model can be extended to edge coding over a wide range of contrasts and blurs. © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mach edges: a key role for 3rd derivative filters in spatial vision

Edges are key points of information in visual scenes. One important class of models supposes that edges correspond to the steepest parts of the luminance profile, implying that they can be found as peaks and troughs in the response of a gradient (first-derivative) filter, or as zero-crossings (ZCs) in the second-derivative. A variety of multi-scale models are based on this idea. We tested this approach by devising a stimulus that has no local peaks of gradient and no ZCs, at any scale. Our stimulus profile is analogous to the classic Mach-band stimulus, but it is the local luminance gradient (not the absolute luminance) that increases as a linear ramp between two plateaux. The luminance profile is a smoothed triangle wave and is obtained by integrating the gradient profile. Subjects used a cursor to mark the position and polarity of perceived edges. For all the ramp-widths tested, observers marked edges at or close to the corner points in the gradient profile, even though these were not gradient maxima. These new Mach edges correspond to peaks and troughs in the third-derivative. They are analogous to Mach bands - light and dark bars are seen where there are no luminance peaks but there are peaks in the second derivative. Here, peaks in the third derivative were seen as light-to-dark edges, troughs as dark-to-light edges. Thus Mach edges are inconsistent with many standard edge detectors, but are nicely predicted by a new model that uses a (nonlinear) third-derivative operator to find edge points.

Motion, flash, and flicker:A unified spatiotemporal model of perceived edge sharpening

Blurred edges appear sharper in motion than when they are stationary. We proposed a model of this motion sharpening that invokes a local, nonlinear contrast transducer function (Hammett et al, 1998 Vision Research 38 2099-2108). Response saturation in the transducer compresses or 'clips' the input spatial waveform, rendering the edges as sharper. To explain the increasing distortion of drifting edges at higher speeds, the degree of nonlinearity must increase with speed or temporal frequency. A dynamic contrast gain control before the transducer can account for both the speed dependence and approximate contrast invariance of motion sharpening (Hammett et al, 2003 Vision Research, in press). We show here that this model also predicts perceived sharpening of briefly flashed and flickering edges, and we show that the model can account fairly well for experimental data from all three modes of presentation (motion, flash, and flicker). At moderate durations and lower temporal frequencies the gain control attenuates the input signal, thus protecting it from later compression by the transducer. The gain control is somewhat sluggish, and so it suffers both a slow onset, and loss of power at high temporal frequencies. Consequently, brief presentations and high temporal frequencies of drift and flicker are less protected from distortion, and show greater perceptual sharpening.

A model for motion sharpening: contrast gain control precedes compressive nonlinearity

Blurred edges appear sharper in motion than when they are stationary. We have previously shown how such distortions in perceived edge blur may be explained by a model which assumes that luminance contrast is encoded by a local contrast transducer whose response becomes progressively more compressive as speed increases. To test this model further, we measured the sharpening of drifting, periodic patterns over a large range of contrasts, blur widths, and speeds Human Vision. The results indicate that, while sharpening increased with speed, it was practically invariant with contrast. This contrast invariance cannot be explained by a fixed compressive nonlinearity since that predicts almost no sharpening at low contrasts.We show by computational modelling of spatiotemporal responses that, if a dynamic contrast gain control precedes the static nonlinear transducer, then motion sharpening, its speed dependence, and its invariance with contrast can be predicted with reasonable accuracy.