Amodal completion with background determines depth from monocular gap stereopsis

Grove, Gillam, and Ono [Grove, P. M., Gillam, B. J., & Ono, H. (2002). Content and context. of monocular regions determine perceived depth in random dot, unpaired background and phantom stereograms. Vision Research, 42, 1859-1870] reported that perceived depth in monocular gap stereograms [Gillam, B. J., Blackburn, S., & Nakayama, K. (1999). Stereopsis based on monocular gaps: Metrical encoding of depth and slant without matching contours. Vision Research, 39, 493-502] was attenuated when the color/texture in the monocular gap did not match the background. It appears that continuation of the gap with the background constitutes an important component of the stimulus conditions that allow a monocular gap in an otherwise binocular surface to be responded to as a depth step. In this report we tested this view using the conventional monocular gap stimulus of two identical grey rectangles separated by a gap in one eye but abutting to form a solid grey rectangle in the other. We compared depth seen at the gap for this stimulus with stimuli that were identical except for two additional small black squares placed at the ends of the gap. If the squares were placed stereoscopically behind the rectangle/gap configuration (appearing on the background) they interfered with the perceived depth at the gap. However when they were placed in front of the configuration this attenuation disappeared. The gap and the background were able under these conditions to complete amodally. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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.

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.

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.

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]

Blobs versus bars:psychophysical evidence supports two types of orientation response in human color vision

The classic hypothesis of Livingstone and Hubel (1984, 1987) proposed two types of color pathways in primate visual cortex based on recordings from single cells: a segregated, modularpathway that signals color but provides little information about shape or form and a second pathway that signals color differences and so defines forms without the need to specify their colors. A major problem has been to reconcile this neurophysiological hypothesis with the behavioral data. A wealth of psychophysical studies has demonstrated that color vision has orientation-tuned responses and little impairment on form related tasks, but these have not revealed any direct evidence for nonoriented mechanisms. Here we use a psychophysical method of subthreshold summation across orthogonal orientations for isoluminant red-green gratings in monocular and dichoptic viewing conditions to differentiate between nonoriented and orientation-tuned responses to color contrast. We reveal nonoriented color responses at low spatial frequencies (0.25-0.375 c/deg) under monocular conditions changing to orientation-tuned responses at higher spatial frequencies (1.5 c/deg) and under binocular conditions. We suggest that two distinct pathways coexist in color vision at the behavioral level, revealed at different spatial scales: one is isotropic, monocular, and best equipped for the representation of surface color, and the other is orientation-tuned, binocular, and selective for shape and form. This advances our understanding of the organization of the neural pathways involved in human color vision and provides a strong link between neurophysiological and behavioral data. © 2013 ARVO.

The vision strategy of golf putting

Golfers, coaches and researchers alike, have all keyed in on golf putting as an important aspect of overall golf performance. Of the three principle putting tasks (green reading, alignment and the putting action phase), the putting action phase has attracted the most attention from coaches, players and researchers alike. This phase includes the alignment of the club with the ball, the swing, and ball contact. A significant amount of research in this area has focused on measuring golfer’s vision strategies with eye tracking equipment. Unfortunately this research suffers from a number of shortcomings, which limit its usefulness. The purpose of this thesis was to address some of these shortcomings. The primary objective of this thesis was to re-evaluate golfer’s putting vision strategies using binocular eye tracking equipment and to define a new, optimal putting vision strategy which was associated with both higher skill and success. In order to facilitate this research, bespoke computer software was developed and validated, and new gaze behaviour criteria were defined. Additionally, the effects of training (habitual) and competition conditions on the putting vision strategy were examined, as was the effect of ocular dominance. Finally, methods for improving golfer’s binocular vision strategies are discussed, and a clinical plan for the optometric management of the golfer’s vision is presented. The clinical management plan includes the correction of fundamental aspects of golfers’ vision, including monocular refractive errors and binocular vision defects, as well as enhancement of their putting vision strategy, with the overall aim of improving performance on the golf course. This research has been undertaken in order to gain a better understanding of the human visual system and how it relates to the sport performance of golfers specifically. Ultimately, the analysis techniques and methods developed are applicable to the assessment of visual performance in all sports.

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.

Plane detection from monocular image sequences

AIRES, Kelson R. T. ; ARAÚJO, Hélder J. ; MEDEIROS, Adelardo A. D. . Plane Detection from Monocular Image Sequences. In: VISUALIZATION, IMAGING AND IMAGE PROCESSING, 2008, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. Proceedings..., Palma de Mallorca: VIIP, 2008

Plane detection from monocular image sequences

AIRES, Kelson R. T. ; ARAÚJO, Hélder J. ; MEDEIROS, Adelardo A. D. . Plane Detection from Monocular Image Sequences. In: VISUALIZATION, IMAGING AND IMAGE PROCESSING, 2008, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. Proceedings..., Palma de Mallorca: VIIP, 2008

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.