OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

| OPTICS, IMAGE SCIENCE, AND VISION

  • Vol. 4, Iss. 12 — Dec. 1, 1987
  • pp: 2379–2394

Relations between the statistics of natural images and the response properties of cortical cells

David J. Field  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 4, Issue 12, pp. 2379-2394 (1987)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.4.002379


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (3817 KB) Open Access





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

The relative efficiency of any particular image-coding scheme should be defined only in relation to the class of images that the code is likely to encounter. To understand the representation of images by the mammalian visual system, it might therefore be useful to consider the statistics of images from the natural environment (i.e., images with trees, rocks, bushes, etc). In this study, various coding schemes are compared in relation to how they represent the information in such natural images. The coefficients of such codes are represented by arrays of mechanisms that respond to local regions of space, spatial frequency, and orientation (Gabor-like transforms). For many classes of image, such codes will not be an efficient means of representing information. However, the results obtained with six natural images suggest that the orientation and the spatial-frequency tuning of mammalian simple cells are well suited for coding the information in such images if the goal of the code is to convert higher-order redundancy (e.g., correlation between the intensities of neighboring pixels) into first-order redundancy (i.e., the response distribution of the coefficients). Such coding produces a relatively high signal-to-noise ratio and permits information to be transmitted with only a subset of the total number of cells. These results support Barlow’s theory that the goal of natural vision is to represent the information in the natural environment with minimal redundancy.

© 1987 Optical Society of America

History
Original Manuscript: May 15, 1987
Manuscript Accepted: August 14, 1987
Published: December 1, 1987

Citation
David J. Field, "Relations between the statistics of natural images and the response properties of cortical cells," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 2379-2394 (1987)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-4-12-2379


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. D. G. Hubel, T. N. Weisel, “Receptive fields, binocular interaction, and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex,”J. Physiol. 160, 106–154 (1962).
  2. D. Marr, Vision (Freeman, San Francisco, 1981).
  3. H. R. Wilson, J. R. Bergen, “A four mechanism model for threshold spatial vision,” Vision Res. 19, 19–33 (1979). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. A. B. Watson, “Detection and recognition of simple spatial forms,” in Physical and Biological Processing of Images, O. J. Braddick, A. C. Slade, eds. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983). [CrossRef]
  5. F. W. Campbell, J. G. Robson, “Application of Fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings,”J. Physiol. 197, 551–556 (1968). [PubMed]
  6. C. Blakemore, F. W. Campbell “On the existence of neurones in the human visual system selectively sensitive to the orientation and size of retinal images,” J. Physiol. 203, 237–260 (1969). [PubMed]
  7. D. Marr, E. Hildreth, “Theory of edge detection,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 207, 187–217 (1980). [CrossRef]
  8. D. J. Field, D. J. Tolhurst, “The structure and symmetry of simple-cell receptive field profiles in the cat’s visual cortex,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 228, 379–400 (1986). [CrossRef]
  9. L. A. Palmer, J- P. Jones, W. H. Mullikin, “Functional organization of simple cell receptive fields,” in Models of the Visual Cortex, D. Rose, V. G. Dobson, eds. (Wiley, New York, 1985), pp. 273–280.
  10. S. Marcelja, “Mathematical description of the responses of simple cortical cells,”J. Opt. Soc. Am. 70, 1297–1300 (1980). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. J. J. Kulikowski, S. Marcelja, P. O. Bishop, “Theory of spatial position and spatial frequency relations in, the receptive fields of simple cells in the visual cortex,” Biol. Cybern. 43, 187–198 (1982). [CrossRef]
  12. J. G. Daugman, “Uncertainty relation for resolution in space, spatial frequency, and orientation optimized by two-dimensional visual cortical filters,”J. Opt. Soc Am. A 2, 1160–1169 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. M. R. Turner, “Texture discrimination by Gabor functions,” Biol. Cybern. 55, 71–83 (1986). [PubMed]
  14. D. Gabor, “Theory of communication,”J. Inst. Electr. Eng. 93, 429–457 (1946).
  15. M. V. Srinivasan, S. B. Laughlin, A. Dubs, “Predictive coding: a fresh view of inhibition in the retina,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 216, 427–459 (1982). [CrossRef]
  16. S. B. Laughlin, “Matching coding scenes to enhance efficiency,” in Physical and Biological Processing of Images, O. J. Braddick, A. C. Sleigh, eds. (Springer, Berlin, 1983), pp. 42–72. [CrossRef]
  17. E. Switkes, M. J. Mayer, J. A. Sloan, “Spatial frequency analysis of the visual environment: anistropy and the carpentered environment hypothesis,” Vision Res. 18, 1393–1399 (1978). [CrossRef]
  18. D. Kersten, “Predictability and redundancy of natural images,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 2395–2400 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. J. J. Gibson, The Perception of the Visual World (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1966).
  20. H. B. Barlow, “The coding of sensory messages,” in Current Problems in Animal Behavior, W. H. Thorpe, O. L. Zangwill, eds. (Cambridge U. Press, Cambridge, 1961), pp. 331–360.
  21. H. B. Barlow, “Three theories of cortical function,” in Development Neurobiology of Vision, R. D. Freeman, ed. (Plenum, New York, 1979), pp. 1–16. [CrossRef]
  22. H. B. Barlow, “The Ferrier lecture,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 212, 1–34 (1981). [CrossRef]
  23. H. B. Barlow, “Understanding natural vision,” in Physical and Biological Processing of Images, O. J. Braddick, A. C. Sleigh, eds., Vol. 11 of Springer Series in Information Sciences (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983), pp. 2–14. [CrossRef]
  24. B. Sakitt, H. B. Barlow, “A model for the economical encoding of the visual image in cerebral cortex,” Biol. Cybern, 43, 97–108 (1982). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. A. N. Netraveli, J. O. Limb, “Picture coding: a review,” Proc. IEEE 68, 366–406 (1980). [CrossRef]
  26. C. E. Shannon, W. Weaver. The Mathematical Theory of Communication (U. Illinois Press, Champaign, Ill.1949).
  27. D. A. Pollen, S. F. Ronner, “Phase relationships between adjacent simple cells in the cat,” Science 212, 1409–1411 (1981). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. R. N. Bracewell, The Fourier Transform and Its Applications (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965).
  29. A. W. Rihaczek, “Signal energy distribution in time and frequency,”IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory IT-14, 369–374 (1968). [CrossRef]
  30. R. F. Voss, “Random fractal forgeries,” in Fundamental Algorithms for Compuer Graphics, R. A. Earnshaw, ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985), pp. 805–829. [CrossRef]
  31. D. J. Tolhurst, J. A. Movshon, A. F. Dean, “The statistical reliability of single neurons in act and monkey visual cortex,” Vision Res. 23, 775–785 (1983). [CrossRef]
  32. M. Hawken, A. Parker, “Spatial properties of neurons in the monkey striate cortex,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 231, 251–288 (1987). [CrossRef]
  33. K. K. DeValois, R. L. DeValois, E. W. Yund, “Responses of striate cortical cells to grating and checkerboard patterns,”J. Physiol. 291, 483–505 (1980).
  34. D. G. Albrecht, R. L. DeValois, L. G. Thorell, “Visual cortical neurons: are bars or gratings the optimal stimuli?” Science 207, 88–90 (1981). [CrossRef]
  35. The redundancy of any particular representation must be defined over all n th-order statistics (i.e., over all the possible conditional probabilities). Transforming the coordinate system from one set of coordinates to another (e.g., rotation) will not alter the total redundancy of the representation but may transform redundancy of one form (e.g., third order) into that of another (e.g., first order).
  36. T. Bossomaier, A. W. Synder, “Why spatial frequency processing in the visual cortex?” Vision Res. 26, 1307–1309 (1986). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. D. J. Tolhurst, I. D. Thompson, “On the variety of spatial frequency selectivities shown by neurons in area 17 of the cat,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 213, 183–199 (1982). [CrossRef]
  38. R. L. DeValois, D. G. Albrecht, L. G. Thorell, “Spatial frequency selectivity of cells in macaque visual cortex,” Vision Res. 22, 545–559 (1982). [CrossRef]
  39. J. A. Movshon, “Two-dimensional spatial frequency tuning of cat striate cortical neurons,” in Society for Neuroscience Abstracts (Society for Neuroscience, Atlanta, Ga., 1979), p. 799.
  40. M. A. Webster, R. L. DeValois, “Relationship between spatial-frequency and orientation tuning of striate-cortex cells,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1124–1132 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. It should be noted that the neurophysiological data do not support the notion of constant bandwidths in octaves.37,38 Not only is there a wide range of bandwidths but the average bandwidth shows some decrease with increasing frequency. The present model has yet to account for this decrease.

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited