The interaction of luminance and texture amplitude in surface depth perception

Previous studies have suggested separate channels for detection of first-order luminance modulations (LM) and second-order modulations of the local amplitude (AM) of a texture. Mixtures of LM and AM with different phase relationships appear very different: in-phase compounds (LM + AM) look like 3-D corrugated surfaces, while out-of-phase compounds (LM - AM) appear flat and/or transparent. This difference may arise because the in-phase compounds are consistent with multiplicative shading, while the out-of-phase compounds are not. We investigated the role of these modulation components in surface depth perception. We used a textured background with thin bars formed by local changes in luminance and/or texture amplitude. These stimuli appear as embossed surfaces with wide and narrow regions. Keeping the AM modulation depth fixed at a suprathreshold level, we determined the amount of luminance contrast required for observers to correctly indicate the width (narrow or wide) of 'raised' regions in the display. Performance (compared to the LM-only case) was facilitated by the presence of AM, but, unexpectedly, performance for LM - AM was as good as for LM + AM. Thus, these results suggest that there is an interaction between first-order and second-order mechanisms during depth perception based on shading cues, but the phase dependence is not yet understood.

The interaction of luminance and texture amplitude in depth perception

Previous studies have suggested separate channels for the detection of first-order luminance (LM) and second-order modulations of the local amplitude (AM) of a texture (Schofield and Georgeson, 1999 Vision Research 39 2697 - 2716; Georgeson and Schofield, 2002 Spatial Vision 16 59). It has also been shown that LM and AM mixtures with different phase relationships are easily separated in identification tasks, and (informally) appear very different with the in-phase compound (LM + AM), producing the most realistic depth percept. We investigated the role of these LM and AM components in depth perception. Stimuli consisted of a noise texture background with thin bars formed as local increments or decrements in luminance and/or noise amplitude. These stimuli appear as embossed surfaces with wide and narrow regions. When luminance and amplitude changes have the same sign and magnitude (LM + AM) the overall modulation is consistent with multiplicative shading, but this is not so when the two modulations have opposite sign (LM - AM). Keeping the AM modulation depth fixed at a suprathreshold level, we determined the amount of luminance contrast required for observers to correctly indicate the width (narrow or wide) of raised regions in the display. Performance (compared to the LM-only case) was facilitated by the presence of AM, but, unexpectedly, performance for LM - AM was even better than for LM + AM. Further tests suggested that this improvement in performance is not due to an increase in the detectability of luminance in the compound stimuli. Thus, contrary to previous findings, these results suggest the possibility of interaction between first-order and second-order mechanisms in depth perception.

Interaction of peptides, peptidomimetics and other drug candidates with the DI/tripeptide transport system in intestinal epithelial cells, using the in vitro caco-2 cell culture system

An uptake system was developed using Caco-2 cell monolayers and the dipeptide, glycyl-[3H]L-proline, as a probe compound. Glycyl-[3H]L-proline uptake was via the di-/tripeptide transport system (DTS) and, exhibited concentration-, pH- and temperature-dependency. Dipeptides inhibited uptake of the probe, and the design of the system allowed competitors to be ranked against one another with respect to affinity for the transporter. The structural features required to ensure or increase interaction with the DTS were defined by studying the effect of a series of glycyl-L-proline and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitor (SQ-29852) analogues on the uptake of the probe. The SQ-29852 structure was divided into six domains (A-F) and competitors were grouped into series depending on structural variations within specific regions. Domain A was found to prefer a hydrophobic function, such as a phenyl group, and was intolerant to positive charges and H+ -acceptors and donors. SQ-29852 analogues were more tolerant of substitutions in the C domain, compared to glycyl-L-proline analogues, suggesting that interactions along the length of the SQ-29852 molecule may override the effects of substitutions in the C domain. SQ-29852 analogues showed a preference for a positive function, such as an amine group in this region, but dipeptide structures favoured an uncharged substitution. Lipophilic substituents in domain D increased affinity of SQ-29852 analogues with the DTS. A similar effect was observed for ACE-NEP inhibitor analogues. Domain E, corresponding to the carboxyl group was found to be tolerant of esterification for SQ-29852 analogues but not for dipeptides. Structural features which may increase interaction for one series of compounds, may not have the same effect for another series, indicating that the presence of multiple recognition sites on a molecule may override the deleterious effect of anyone change. Modifying current, poorly absorbed peptidomimetic structures to fit the proposed hypothetical model may improve oral bioavailability by increasing affinity for the DTS. The stereochemical preference of the transporter was explored using four series of compounds (SQ-29852, lysylproline, alanylproline and alanylalanine enantiomers). The L, L stereochemistry was the preferred conformation for all four series, agreeing with previous studies. However, D, D enantiomers were shown in some cases to be substrates for the DTS, although exhibiting a lower affinity than their L, L counterparts. All the ACE-inhibitors and β-lactam antibiotics investigated, produced a degree of inhibition of the probe, and thus show some affinity for the DTS. This contrasts with previous reports that found several ACE inhibitors to be absorbed via a passive process, thus suggesting that compounds are capable of binding to the transporter site and inhibiting the probe without being translocated into the cell. This was also shown to be the case for oligodeoxynucleotide conjugated to a lipophilic group (vitamin E), and highlights the possibility that other orally administered drug candidates may exert non-specific effects on the DTS and possibly have a nutritional impact. Molecular modelling of selected ACE-NEP inhibitors revealed that the three carbonyl functions can be oriented in a similar direction, and this conformation was found to exist in a local energy-minimised state, indicating that the carbonyls may possibly be involved in hydrogen-bond formation with the binding site of the DTS.

The value of innovation:the interaction of competition, R&D and IP

This paper analyses market valuations of UK companies using a new data set of their R&D and IP activities (1989–2002). In contrast to previous studies, the analysis is conducted at the sectoral-level, where the sectors are based on the technological classification originating from Pavitt [Pavitt, K., 1984. Sectoral patterns of technical change. Research Policy 13, 343–373]. The first main result is that the valuation of R&D varies substantially across these sectors. Another important result is that, on average, firms that receive only UK patents tend to have no significant market premium. In direct contrast, patenting through the European Patent Office does raise market value, as does the registration of trade marks in the UK for most sectors. To explore these variations the paper links competitive conditions with the market valuation of innovation. Using profit persistence as a measure of competitive pressure, we find that the sectors that are the most competitive have the lowest market valuation of R&D. Furthermore, within the most competitive sector (‘science based’ manufacturing), firms with larger market shares (an inverse indicator of competitive pressure) also have higher R&D valuations, as well as some positive return to UK patents. We conclude that this evidence supports Schumpeter by finding higher returns to innovation in less than fully competitive markets and contradicts Arrow [Arrow, K., 1962. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: Nelson, R. (Ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton University Press, Princeton], who argued that, with the existence of IP rights, competitive market structure provides higher incentives to innovate.