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 summation, binocular fusion and the transition to diplopia

The visual system combines spatial signals from the two eyes to achieve single vision. But if binocular disparity is too large, this perceptual fusion gives way to diplopia. We studied and modelled the processes underlying fusion and the transition to diplopia. The likely basis for fusion is linear summation of inputs onto binocular cortical cells. Previous studies of perceived position, contrast matching and contrast discrimination imply the computation of a dynamicallyweighted sum, where the weights vary with relative contrast. For gratings, perceived contrast was almost constant across all disparities, and this can be modelled by allowing the ocular weights to increase with disparity (Zhou, Georgeson & Hess, 2014). However, when a single Gaussian-blurred edge was shown to each eye perceived blur was invariant with disparity (Georgeson & Wallis, ECVP 2012) – not consistent with linear summation (which predicts that perceived blur increases with disparity). This blur constancy is consistent with a multiplicative form of combination (the contrast-weighted geometric mean) but that is hard to reconcile with the evidence favouring linear combination. We describe a 2-stage spatial filtering model with linear binocular combination and suggest that nonlinear output transduction (eg. ‘half-squaring’) at each stage may account for the blur constancy.

Análise do comportamento de técnicas de correspondência binocular para imagens em alta definição

This work presents an analysis of the behavior of some algorithms usually available in stereo correspondence literature, with full HD images (1920x1080 pixels) to establish, within the precision dilemma versus runtime applications which these methods can be better used. The images are obtained by a system composed of a stereo camera coupled to a computer via a capture board. The OpenCV library is used for computer vision operations and processing images involved. The algorithms discussed are an overall method of search for matching blocks with the Sum of the Absolute Value of the difference (Sum of Absolute Differences - SAD), a global technique based on cutting energy graph cuts, and a so-called matching technique semi -global. The criteria for analysis are processing time, the consumption of heap memory and the mean absolute error of disparity maps generated.

Real-time tracking system using C80 DSPs and a binocular robotic head

[EN]An active vision system to perform tracking of moving objects in real time is described. The main goal is to obtain a system integrating off-the-self components. These components includes a stereoscopic robotic-head, as active perception hardware; a DSP based board SDB C80, as massive data processor and image acquisition board; and finally, a Pentium PC running Windows NT that interconnects and manages the whole system. Real-time is achieved taking advantage of the special architecture of DSP. An evaluation of the performance is included.

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.

Visual suppression in intermittent exotropia during binocular alignment.

PURPOSE To investigate the cortical mechanisms that prevent diplopia in intermittent exotropia (X(T)) during binocular alignment (orthotropia). METHODS The authors studied 12 X(T) patients aged 5 to 22 years. Seventy-five percent had functional stereo vision with stereoacuity similar to that of 12 age-matched controls (0.2-3.7 min arc). Identical face images were presented to the two eyes for 400 ms. In one eye, the face was presented at the fovea; in the other, offset along the horizontal axis with up to 12° eccentricity. The task was to indicate whether one or two faces were perceived. RESULTS All X(T) patients showed normal diplopia when the nonfoveal face was presented to nasal hemiretina, though with a slightly larger fusional range than age-matched controls. However, 10 of 12 patients never experienced diplopia when the nonfoveal face was presented to temporal hemiretina (i.e., when the stimulus simulated exodeviation). Patients showed considerable variability when the single image was perceived. Some patients suppressed the temporal stimulus regardless of which eye viewed it, whereas others suppressed a particular eye even when it viewed the foveal stimulus. In two patients, the simulated exodeviation might have triggered a shift from normal to anomalous retinal correspondence. CONCLUSIONS Antidiplopic mechanisms in X(T) can be reliably triggered by purely retinal information during orthotropia, but the nature of these mechanisms varies between patients.