Contrast discrimination with simultaneous monocular and dichoptic masks

In experiments reported elsewhere at this conference, we have revealed two striking results concerning binocular interactions in a masking paradigm. First, at low mask contrasts, a dichoptic masking grating produces a small facilitatory effect on the detection of a similar test grating. Second, the psychometric slope for dichoptic masking starts high (Weibull ß~4) at detection threshold, becomes low (ß~1.2) in the facilitatory region, and then unusually steep at high mask contrasts (ß~5.5). Neither of these results is consistent with Legge's (1984 Vision Research 24 385 - 394) model of binocular summation, but they are predicted by a two-stage gain control model in which interocular suppression precedes binocular summation. Here, we pose a further challenge for this model by using a 'twin-mask' paradigm (cf Foley, 1994 Journal of the Optical Society of America A 11 1710 - 1719). In 2AFC experiments, observers detected a patch of grating (1 cycle deg-1, 200 ms) presented to one eye in the presence of a pedestal in the same eye and a spatially identical mask in the other eye. The pedestal and mask contrasts varied independently, producing a two-dimensional masking space in which the orthogonal axes (10X10 contrasts) represent conventional dichoptic and monocular masking. The resulting surface (100 thresholds) confirmed and extended the observations above, and fixed the six parameters in the model, which fitted the data well. With no adjustment of parameters, the model described performance in a further experiment where mask and test were presented to both eyes. Moreover, in both model and data, binocular summation was greater than a factor of v2 at detection threshold. We conclude that this two-stage nonlinear model, with interocular suppression, gives a good account of early binocular processes in the perception of contrast. [Supported by EPSRC Grant Reference: GR/S74515/01]

Retinal drusen detection using the Nidek F-10 SLO in retro-mode

Presentaton Purpose:We conducted a small study to assess the novel, retro - mode imaging technique of the NIDEK F-10 scanning laser ophthalmoscope, for detecting and quantifying retinal drusen. Methods:Fundus photographs of 4 eyes of 2 patients taken in retro-mode on the Nidek F-10 SLO were graded independently by 6,experienced, masked fundus graders for the presence of retinal drusen , and compared to stereo colour fundus photographs taken with a Topcon TRC-50DX camera. Results:The mean number of retinal drusen detected in retro mode was 142.96+/- 60.8, range 63-265, and on colour fundus photography mean of 66.6+/-32.6, range 26-177. All observers independently detected approximately twice as many drusen on retro-mode than colour fundus photography (p<0.0001, Student’s paired t-test) . The statistical significance of interobserver variation in drusen detection was p=0.07 on colour fundus photography , and p=0.02 on retro mode ( ANOVA) . Conclusions:The retro-mode of the F-10 camera uses infrared laser and an aperture with a modified central stop, with the aperture deviated laterally from the confocal light path. This forms a pseudo -3D image which is a new means of detecting abnomalites in the deeper retinal layers. Retro-mode imaging of retinal drusen using the F-10 Nidek SLO is a highly sensitive technique for detecting and quantifying retinal drusen , and detected twice as many drusen than colour fundus photography. This small pilot study suggests that this novel type of imaging may have a role in the future detection and analysis of retinal drusen, a field that is likely to become increasingly important in future AMD prevention studies.

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.