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. 5, Iss. 11 — Nov. 1, 1988
  • pp: 1986–2007

Drift-balanced random stimuli: a general basis for studying non-Fourier motion perception

Charles Chubb and George Sperling  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 5, Issue 11, pp. 1986-2007 (1988)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.5.001986


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (3285 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

To some degree, all current models of visual motion-perception mechanisms depend on the power of the visual signal in various spatiotemporal-frequency bands. Here we show how to construct counterexamples: visual stimuli that are consistently perceived as obviously moving in a fixed direction yet for which Fourier-domain power analysis yields no systematic motion components in any given direction. We provide a general theoretical framework for investigating non-Fourier motion-perception mechanisms; central are the concepts of drift-balanced and microbalanced random stimuli. A random stimulus S is drift balanced if its expected power in the frequency domain is symmetric with respect to temporal frequency, that is, if the expected power in S of every drifting sinusoidal component is equal to the expected power of the sinusoid of the same spatial frequency, drifting at the same rate in the opposite direction. Additionally, S is microbalanced if the result WS of windowing S by any space–time-separable function W is drift balanced. We prove that (i) any space–time-separable random (or nonrandom) stimulus is microbalanced; (ii) any linear combination of pairwise independent microbalanced (respectively, drift-balanced) random stimuli is microbalanced and drift balanced if the expectation of each component is uniformly zero; (iii) the convolution of independent microbalanced and drift-balanced random stimuli is microbalanced and drift balanced; (iv) the product of independent microbalanced random stimuli is microbalanced; and (v) the expected response of any Reichardt detector to any microbalanced random stimulus is zero at every instant in time. Examples are provided of classes of microbalanced random stimuli that display consistent and compelling motion in one direction. All the results and examples from the domain of motion perception are transposable to the space-domain problem of detecting orientation in a texture pattern.

© 1988 Optical Society of America

History
Original Manuscript: November 17, 1987
Manuscript Accepted: June 7, 1988
Published: November 1, 1988

Citation
Charles Chubb and George Sperling, "Drift-balanced random stimuli: a general basis for studying non-Fourier motion perception," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 5, 1986-2007 (1988)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-5-11-1986


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. J. P. H. van Santen, G. Sperling, “Temporal covariance model of motion perception,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1, 451–473 (1984). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. J. P. H. van Santen, G. Sperling, “Elaborated Reichardt detectors,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 300–321 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. E. H. Adelson, J. R. Bergen, “Spatiotemporal energy models for the perception of motion,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 284–299 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. A. B. Watson, A. J. Ahumada, “A look at motion in the frequency domain,” NASA Tech. Memo. 84352 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C., 1983).
  5. D. J. Fleet, A. D. Jepson, “On the hierarchical construction of orientation and velocity selective filters,” Tech. Rep. RBCV-TR-85-8 (Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, 1985).
  6. D. J. Heeger, “Model for the extraction of image flow,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 1455–1471 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. A. Pantle, L. Picciano, “A multistable movement display: evidence for two separate motion systems in human vision,” Science 193, 500–502 (1976). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. M. Green, “What determines correspondence strength in apparent motion,” Vision Res. 26, 599–607, 1986. [CrossRef]
  9. A. M. Derrington, G. B. Henning, “Errors in direction-of-motion discrimination with complex stimuli,” Vision Res. 27, 61–75 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. A. M. Derrington, D. R. Badcock, “Separate detectors for simple and complex grating patterns?” Vision Res. 25, 1869–1878 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. A. Pantle, K. Turano, “Direct comparisons of apparent motions produced with luminance, contrast-modulated (CM), and texture gratings,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 27, 141 (1986).
  12. K. Turano, A. Pantle, “On the mechanism that encodes the movement of contrast variations. I. velocity discrimination,” submitted to Vision Res.
  13. G. Sperling, “Movement perception in computer-driven visual displays,” Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. 8, 144–151 (1976). [CrossRef]
  14. J. T. Petersik, K. I. Hicks, A. J. Pantle, “Apparent movement of successively generated subjective figures,” Perception 7, 371–383 (1978). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. C. Chubb, G. Sperling, “Drift-balanced random stimuli: a general basis for studying non-Fourier motion perception,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 28, 233 (1987).
  16. The main demonstrations and results described herein were first reported at the Symposium on Computational Models in Vision, Center for Visual Science, University of Rochester, June 20, 1986, and at the meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Opthalmology, Sarasota, Florida, May 7, 1987.
  17. A. B. Watson, A. J. Ahumada, “Model of human visual-motion sensing,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 322–342 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. J. Victor, “Nonlinear processes in spatial vision: analysis with stochastic visual textures,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 29, 118 (1988).
  19. C. Chubb, G. Sperling, “Texture quilts: basic tools for studying motion from texture,” Publ. 88-1 of Mathematical Studies in Perception and Cognition (Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, 1988).
  20. W. Reichardt, “Autokorrelationsauswertung als Funktionsprinzip des Zentralnervensystems,” Z. Naturforschung Teil B 12, 447–457 (1957).
  21. J. P. H. van Santen, G. Sperling, “Applications of a Reichardt-type model of two-frame motion,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 25, 14 (1984).
  22. A. B. Watson, A. J. Ahumada, J. E. Farrell, “The window of visibility: a psychophysical theory of fidelity in time-sampled motion displays,” NASA Tech. Paper 2211 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C., 1983).
  23. A. B. Watson, A. J. Ahumada, J. E. Farrell, “Window of visibility: a psychophysical theory of fidelity in time-sampled visual motion displays,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 3, 300–307 (1986). [CrossRef]
  24. S. Grossberg, E. Mingolla, “Neural dynamics of form perception boundary completion, illusory figures and neon color spreading,” Psychol. Rev. 92, 173–211 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. S. Grossberg, E. Mingolla, “Neural dynamics of form perception: textures, boundaries, and emergent segmentations,” Percept. Psychophys 38, 141–171 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. R. J. Watt, M. J. Morgan, “The recognition and representation of edge blur: evidence of spatial primitives in human vision,” Vision Res. 23, 1465–1477 (1983). [CrossRef]
  27. R. J. Watt, M. J. Morgan, “Spatial filters and the localization of luminance changes in human vision,” Vision Res. 24, 1387–1397 (1984). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. R. J. Watt, M. J. Morgan, “A theory of the primitive spatial code in human vision,” Vision Res. 25, 1661–1674 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. G. J. Burton, “Evidence of nonlinear response processes in the human visual system from measurements on the thresholds of spatial beat frequencies,” Vision Res. 13, 1211–1225 (1973). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. A. Y. Maudarbocus, K. H. Ruddock, “Non-linearity of visual signals in relation to shape-sensitive adaptation responses,” Vision Res. 13, 1713–1737 (1973). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. E. Peli, “Perception of high-pass filtered images,” in Visual Communications and Image Processing II, T. R. Hsing, ed., Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.845, 140–146 (1987). [CrossRef]
  32. T. Caelli, “Three processing characteristics of visual texture segmentation,” Spatial Vision 1, 19–30 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. C. Chubb, G. Sperling, D. H. Parish, “Designing psychophysical discriminations tasks for which ideal performance is computationally tractable,” Publ. 88-2 of Mathematical Studies in Perception and Cognition (Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, 1988).
  34. D. M. Green, J. A. Swets, Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics (Wiley, New York, 1966), pp. 209–231.
  35. C. Chubb, G. Sperling, “Processing stages in non-Fourier motion perception,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 29, 266 (1988).
  36. G. A. Miller, W. G. Taylor, “The perception of repeated bursts of noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 20, 171–182 (1948). [CrossRef]
  37. W. Feller, An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications (Wiley, New York, 1966), Vol. 2, p. 151.

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