Pattern integration in the normal and abnormal human visual system

The processing conducted by the visual system requires the combination of signals that are detected at different locations in the visual field. The processes by which these signals are combined are explored here using psychophysical experiments and computer modelling. Most of the work presented in this thesis is concerned with the summation of contrast over space at detection threshold. Previous investigations of this sort have been confounded by the inhomogeneity in contrast sensitivity across the visual field. Experiments performed in this thesis find that the decline in log contrast sensitivity with eccentricity is bilinear, with an initial steep fall-off followed by a shallower decline. This decline is scale-invariant for spatial frequencies of 0.7 to 4 c/deg. A detailed map of the inhomogeneity is developed, and applied to area summation experiments both by incorporating it into models of the visual system and by using it to compensate stimuli in order to factor out the effects of the inhomogeneity. The results of these area summation experiments show that the summation of contrast over area is spatially extensive (occurring over 33 stimulus carrier cycles), and that summation behaviour is the same in the fovea, parafovea, and periphery. Summation occurs according to a fourth-root summation rule, consistent with a “noisy energy” model. This work is extended to investigate the visual deficit in amblyopia, finding that area summation is normal in amblyopic observers. Finally, the methods used to study the summation of threshold contrast over area are adapted to investigate the integration of coherent orientation signals in a texture. The results of this study are described by a two-stage model, with a mandatory local combination stage followed by flexible global pooling of these local outputs. In each study, the results suggest a more extensive combination of signals in vision than has been previously understood.

Peripheral vision and pattern recognition:a review

We summarize the various strands of research on peripheral vision and relate them to theories of form perception. After a historical overview, we describe quantifications of the cortical magnification hypothesis, including an extension of Schwartz's cortical mapping function. The merits of this concept are considered across a wide range of psychophysical tasks, followed by a discussion of its limitations and the need for non-spatial scaling. We also review the eccentricity dependence of other low-level functions including reaction time, temporal resolution, and spatial summation, as well as perimetric methods. A central topic is then the recognition of characters in peripheral vision, both at low and high levels of contrast, and the impact of surrounding contours known as crowding. We demonstrate how Bouma's law, specifying the critical distance for the onset of crowding, can be stated in terms of the retinocortical mapping. The recognition of more complex stimuli, like textures, faces, and scenes, reveals a substantial impact of mid-level vision and cognitive factors. We further consider eccentricity-dependent limitations of learning, both at the level of perceptual learning and pattern category learning. Generic limitations of extrafoveal vision are observed for the latter in categorization tasks involving multiple stimulus classes. Finally, models of peripheral form vision are discussed. We report that peripheral vision is limited with regard to pattern categorization by a distinctly lower representational complexity and processing speed. Taken together, the limitations of cognitive processing in peripheral vision appear to be as significant as those imposed on low-level functions and by way of crowding.

A predictive in vitro model of the impact of drugs with anticholinergic properties on human neuronal and astrocytic systems

The link between off-target anticholinergic effects of medications and acute cognitive impairment in older adults requires urgent investigation. We aimed to determine whether a relevant in vitro model may aid the identification of anticholinergic responses to drugs and the prediction of anticholinergic risk during polypharmacy. In this preliminary study we employed a co-culture of human-derived neurons and astrocytes (NT2.N/A) derived from the NT2 cell line. NT2.N/A cells possess much of the functionality of mature neurons and astrocytes, key cholinergic phenotypic markers and muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs). The cholinergic response of NT2 astrocytes to the mAChR agonist oxotremorine was examined using the fluorescent dye fluo-4 to quantitate increases in intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i. Inhibition of this response by drugs classified as severe (dicycloverine, amitriptyline), moderate (cyclobenzaprine) and possible (cimetidine) on the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) scale, was examined after exposure to individual and pairs of compounds. Individually, dicycloverine had the most significant effect regarding inhibition of the astrocytic cholinergic response to oxotremorine, followed by amitriptyline then cyclobenzaprine and cimetidine, in agreement with the ACB scale. In combination, dicycloverine with cyclobenzaprine had the most significant effect, followed by dicycloverine with amitriptyline. The order of potency of the drugs in combination frequently disagreed with predicted ACB scores derived from summation of the individual drug scores, suggesting current scales may underestimate the effect of polypharmacy. Overall, this NT2.N/A model may be appropriate for further investigation of adverse anticholinergic effects of multiple medications, in order to inform clinical choices of suitable drug use in the elderly.

A template model predicts detection of sparse stimul

Contemporary models of contrast integration across space assume that pooling operates uniformly over the target region. For sparse stimuli, where high contrast regions are separated by areas containing no signal, this strategy may be sub-optimal because it pools more noise than signal as area increases. Little is known about the behaviour of human observers for detecting such stimuli. We performed an experiment in which three observers detected regular textures of various areas, and six levels of sparseness. Stimuli were regular grids of horizontal grating micropatches, each 1 cycle wide. We varied the ratio of signals (marks) to gaps (spaces), with mark:space ratios ranging from 1 : 0 (a dense texture with no spaces) to 1 : 24. To compensate for the decline in sensitivity with increasing distance from fixation, we adjusted the stimulus contrast as a function of eccentricity based on previous measurements [Baldwin, Meese & Baker, 2012, J Vis, 12(11):23]. We used the resulting area summation functions and psychometric slopes to test several filter-based models of signal combination. A MAX model failed to predict the thresholds, but did a good job on the slopes. Blanket summation of stimulus energy improved the threshold fit, but did not predict an observed slope increase with mark:space ratio. Our best model used a template matched to the sparseness of the stimulus, and pooled the squared contrast signal over space. Templates for regular patterns have also recently been proposed to explain the regular appearance of slightly irregular textures (Morgan et al, 2012, Proc R Soc B, 279, 2754–2760)

Perception of global image contrast is predicted by the same spatial integration model of gain control as detection and discrimination

How are the image statistics of global image contrast computed? We answered this by using a contrast-matching task for checkerboard configurations of ‘battenberg’ micro-patterns where the contrasts and spatial spreads of interdigitated pairs of micro-patterns were adjusted independently. Test stimuli were 20 × 20 arrays with various sized cluster widths, matched to standard patterns of uniform contrast. When one of the test patterns contained a pattern with much higher contrast than the other, that determined global pattern contrast, as in a max() operation. Crucially, however, the full matching functions had a curious intermediate region where low contrast additions for one pattern to intermediate contrasts of the other caused a paradoxical reduction in perceived global contrast. None of the following models predicted this: RMS, energy, linear sum, max, Legge and Foley. However, a gain control model incorporating wide-field integration and suppression of nonlinear contrast responses predicted the results with no free parameters. This model was derived from experiments on summation of contrast at threshold, and masking and summation effects in dipper functions. Those experiments were also inconsistent with the failed models above. Thus, we conclude that our contrast gain control model (Meese & Summers, 2007) describes a fundamental operation in human contrast vision.

Early spatial vision:a view through two eyes

Simple features such as edges are the building blocks of spatial vision, and so I ask: how arevisual features and their properties (location, blur and contrast) derived from the responses ofspatial filters in early vision; how are these elementary visual signals combined across the twoeyes; and when are they not combined? Our psychophysical evidence from blur-matchingexperiments strongly supports a model in which edges are found at the spatial peaks ofresponse of odd-symmetric receptive fields (gradient operators), and their blur B is givenby the spatial scale of the most active operator. This model can explain some surprisingaspects of blur perception: edges look sharper when they are low contrast, and when theirlength is made shorter. Our experiments on binocular fusion of blurred edges show that singlevision is maintained for disparities up to about 2.5*B, followed by diplopia or suppression ofone edge at larger disparities. Edges of opposite polarity never fuse. Fusion may be served bybinocular combination of monocular gradient operators, but that combination - involvingbinocular summation and interocular suppression - is not completely understood.In particular, linear summation (supported by psychophysical and physiological evidence)predicts that fused edges should look more blurred with increasing disparity (up to 2.5*B),but results surprisingly show that edge blur appears constant across all disparities, whetherfused or diplopic. Finally, when edges of very different blur are shown to the left and righteyes fusion may not occur, but perceived blur is not simply given by the sharper edge, nor bythe higher contrast. Instead, it is the ratio of contrast to blur that matters: the edge with theAbstracts 1237steeper gradient dominates perception. The early stages of binocular spatial vision speak thelanguage of luminance gradients.

Binocular functional architecture for detection of contrast-modulated gratings

Combination of signals from the two eyes is the gateway to stereo vision. To gain insight into binocular signal processing, we studied binocular summation for luminance-modulated gratings (L or LM) and contrast-modulated gratings (CM). We measured 2AFC detection thresholds for a signal grating (0.75 c/deg, 216msec) shown to one eye, both eyes, or both eyes out-of-phase. For LM and CM, the carrier noise was in both eyes, even when the signal was monocular. Mean binocular thresholds for luminance gratings (L) were 5.4dB better than monocular thresholds - close to perfect linear summation (6dB). For LM and CM the binocular advantage was again 5-6dB, even when the carrier noise was uncorrelated, anti-correlated, or at orthogonal orientations in the two eyes. Binocular combination for CM probably arises from summation of envelope responses, and not from summation of these conflicting carrier patterns. Antiphase signals produced no binocular advantage, but thresholds were about 1-3dB higher than monocular ones. This is not consistent with simple linear summation, which should give complete cancellation and unmeasurably high thresholds. We propose a three-channel model in which noisy monocular responses to the envelope are binocularly combined in a contrast-weighted sum, but also remain separately available to perception via a max operator. Vision selects the largest of the three responses. With in-phase gratings the binocular channel dominates, but antiphase gratings cancel in the binocular channel and the monocular channels mediate detection. The small antiphase disadvantage might be explained by a subtle influence of background responses on binocular and monocular detection.

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.