Template model for blur coding: the role of early nonlinearity in edge segmentation

We describe a template model for perception of edge blur and identify a crucial early nonlinearity in this process. The main principle is to spatially filter the edge image to produce a 'signature', and then find which of a set of templates best fits that signature. Psychophysical blur-matching data strongly support the use of a second-derivative signature, coupled to Gaussian first-derivative templates. The spatial scale of the best-fitting template signals the edge blur. This model predicts blur-matching data accurately for a wide variety of Gaussian and non-Gaussian edges, but it suffers a bias when edges of opposite sign come close together in sine-wave gratings and other periodic images. This anomaly suggests a second general principle: the region of an image that 'belongs' to a given edge should have a consistent sign or direction of luminance gradient. Segmentation of the gradient profile into regions of common sign is achieved by implementing the second-derivative 'signature' operator as two first-derivative operators separated by a half-wave rectifier. This multiscale system of nonlinear filters predicts perceived blur accurately for periodic and aperiodic waveforms. We also outline its extension to 2-D images and infer the 2-D shape of the receptive fields.

Neuronal convergence in early contrast vision: binocular summation is followed by response nonlinearity and area summation

We assessed summation of contrast across eyes and area at detection threshold ( C t). Stimuli were sine-wave gratings (2.5 c/deg) spatially modulated by cosine- and anticosine-phase raised plaids (0.5 c/deg components oriented at ±45°). When presented dichoptically the signal regions were interdigitated across eyes but produced a smooth continuous grating following their linear binocular sum. The average summation ratio ( C t1/([ C t1+2]) for this stimulus pair was 1.64 (4.3 dB). This was only slightly less than the binocular summation found for the same patch type presented to both eyes, and the area summation found for the two different patch types presented to the same eye. We considered 192 model architectures containing each of the following four elements in all possible orders: (i) linear summation or a MAX operator across eyes, (ii) linear summation or a MAX operator across area, (iii) linear or accelerating contrast transduction, and (iv) additive Gaussian, stochastic noise. Formal equivalences reduced this to 62 different models. The most successful four-element model was: linear summation across eyes followed by nonlinear contrast transduction, linear summation across area, and late noise. Model performance was enhanced when additional nonlinearities were placed before binocular summation and after area summation. The implications for models of probability summation and uncertainty are discussed.