OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A


  • Vol. 5, Iss. 5 — May. 1, 1988
  • pp: 743–755

Discrete analysis of spatial-sensitivity models

Kenneth R. K. Nielsen and Brian A. Wandell  »View Author Affiliations

JOSA A, Vol. 5, Issue 5, pp. 743-755 (1988)

View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (1848 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



The visual representation of spatial patterns begins with a series of linear transformations: the stimulus is blurred by the optics, spatially sampled by the photoreceptor array, spatially pooled by the ganglion-cell receptive fields, and so forth. Models of human spatial-pattern vision commonly summarize the initial transformations by a single linear transformation that maps the stimulus into an array of sensor responses. Some components of the initial linear transformations (e.g., lens blurring, photoreceptor sampling) have been estimated empirically; others have not. A computable model must include some assumptions concerning the unknown components of the initial linear encoding. Even a modest sketch of the initial visual encoding requires the specification of a large number of sensors, making the calculations required for performance predictions quite large. We describe procedures for reducing the computational burden of current models of spatial vision that ensure that the simplifications are consistent with the predictions of the complete model. We also describe a method for using pattern-sensitivity measurements to estimate the initial linear transformation. The method is based on the assumption that detection performance is monotonic with the vector length of the sensor responses. We show how contrast-threshold data can be used to estimate the linear transformation needed to characterize threshold performance.

© 1988 Optical Society of America

Original Manuscript: July 27, 1987
Manuscript Accepted: November 30, 1987
Published: May 1, 1988

Kenneth R. K. Nielsen and Brian A. Wandell, "Discrete analysis of spatial-sensitivity models," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 5, 743-755 (1988)

Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  


  1. O. H. Schade, “Optical and photoelectric analog of the eye,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 46, 721–739 (1956). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. H. deLange, “Relationship between critical flicker frequency and a set of low frequency characteristics of the eye,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 44, 380–389 (1954). [CrossRef]
  3. H. deLange, “Research into the dynamic nature of the human fovea-cortex systems with intermittent and modulated light. II. Phase shift in brightness and delay in color perception,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 48, 784–789 (1958). [CrossRef]
  4. H. deLange, “Research into the dynamic nature of the human fovea-cortex systems with intermittent and modulated light. I. Attenuation characteristics with white and colored light,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 48, 777–784 (1958). [CrossRef]
  5. F. W. Campbell, J. G. Robson, “Application of Fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings,” J. Physiol. London 197, 551–566 (1968). [PubMed]
  6. L. A. Olzak, J. P. Thomas, “Seeing spatial patterns,” in Handbook of Perception and Human Performance, J. P. Thomas, ed. (Wiley, New York, 1986), pp. 7-1, 7-53.
  7. H. R. Wilson, D. J. Gelb, “Modified line-element theory for spatial-frequency and width discrimination,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1, 124–131 (1984). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. H. R. Wilson, D. Regan, “Spatial-frequency adaptation and grating discrimination: predictions of a line-element model,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1, 1091–1096 (1984). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. A. B. Watson, “Detection and recognition of simple spatial forms,” in Physical and Biological Processing of Images, A. C. Slade, ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983), pp. 100–114. [CrossRef]
  10. S. A. Klein, D. M. Levi, “Hyperacuity thresholds of 1 sec: theoretical predictions and empirical validation,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1170–1190 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. D. Marr, Vision (Freeman, San Francisco, 1982).
  12. L. T. Maloney, B. A. Wandell, “A model of a single visual channel’s response to weak test lights,” Vision Res. 24, 633–640 (1984). [CrossRef]
  13. R. F. Quick, “A vector magnitude model of contrast detection,” Kybernetik 16, 65–67 (1974). [CrossRef]
  14. M. B. Sachs, J. Nachmias, J. G. Robson, “Spatial frequency detectors in human vision,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, 1176–1186 (1971). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. A. J. Ahumada, A. B. Watson, “Equivalent-noise model for contrast detection and discrimination,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1133–1139 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. W. S. Geisler, “Ideal observer analysis of visual discrimination,” in Frontiers of Visual Science, The Committee on Vision, National Academy of Sciences, ed. (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1987), pp. 17–31.
  17. A. B. Watson, “The ideal observer concept as a modeling tool,” in Frontiers of Visual Science,The Committee on Vision, National Academy of Sciences, ed. (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1987), pp. 32–37.
  18. A. E. Burgess, R. F. Wagner, R. J. Jennings, H. B. Barlow, “Efficiency of human visual signal discrimination,” Science 214, 93–94 (1981). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. A. B. Watson, H. B. Barlow, J. G. Robson, “What does the eye see best?” Nature 302, 419–422 (1983). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. The sensors used by Wilson and his colleagues have evolved over the years. Thus the set of sensors used in the computations by Wilson and Bergen [H. R. Wilson, J. R. Bergen, “A four mechanism model for threshold spatial vision,” Vision Res. 19, 19–32 (1979)] are different from that used by Wilson and Gelb7; both of these sets are different from that used by Wilson and Regan.8 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. In calculations for which the stimulus is represented before the optical blurring, a higher sampling frequency may be required to represent stimuli adequately. This may occur when sensor characterizations include both the ocular optics and the neural sensors. In our implementation of the Wilson–Gelb calculations, we used a spatial resolution of 120 samples per degree. Our simulations confirmed all their calculations.
  22. K. R. K. Nielsen, A. B. Watson, A. J. Ahumada, “Application of a computable model of human spatial vision to phase discrimination,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1600–1606 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. The Wilson–Gelb sensor set7is not consistent, in this sense, with the sensor set described in Ref. 8.
  24. In some simulations, the effects of noise are modeled by adding a random variable to each of the sensor responses. If noise is added to each sensor output, then we can never be sure that any sensor response is always zero but only that its mean response is zero. Such a sensor contributes only noise. When the total number of sensors is reduced by incorporating stimulus characteristics into the S matrix, then the properties of the noise added to the remaining sensors may have to be adjusted to include the effects of noise that have been deleted from the sensors with a zero-mean response.
  25. W. K. Pratt, Digital Image Processing (Wiley, New York, 1978).
  26. A. Ahumada, “Aliasing predictions from a spin-glass model for assigning cones to color sensitivity classes,” Invest. Opthalmol. 28, 137 (1987).
  27. J. I. Yellott, “Spectral analysis of spatial sampling by photoreceptors: topological disorder prevents aliasing,” Vision Res. 22, 1205–1210 (1982). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. J. I. Yellott, B. A. Wandell, T. N. Cornsweet, “The beginnings of visual perception: the retinal image and its initial encoding,” in Handbook of Physiology: The Nervous System, I. Darien-Smith, ed. (Easton, New York, 1984), Vol. 1, pp. 257–316.
  29. These methods of selecting sensors deserve a careful review, but doing so would take us too far afield from the present analysis.
  30. N. Graham, J. G. Robson, J. Nachmias, “Grating summation of fovea and periphery,” Vision Res. 18, 815–825 (1978). [CrossRef]
  31. N. Graham, J. Nachmias, “Detection of grating patterns containing two spatial frequencies: a comparison of single-channel and multiple-channel models,” Vision Res. 11, 251–259 (1971). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. C. Rashbass, “The visibility of transient changes of luminance,” J. Physiol. London 210, 165–186 (1970). [PubMed]
  33. There will be a correspondingly simple structure in the general 2D case as well. A proper discussion of the structure of the resulting matrix, however, should take into account whether the 2D transformation is separable. The added complexity would take us far afield from our main point. The reader may consult various standard references [e.g., A. Rosenfeld, A. C. Kak, Digital Picture Processing (Academic, New York, 1982), Vol. 1, p. 137;W. K. Pratt, Digital Image Processing (Wiley, New York, 1978), p. 203] for a review of some of the issues concerning the structure in 2D linear operators and their associated quadratic forms.
  34. Graham et al.30report their data in units of contrast normalized so that the threshold to each of the components alone is set near 1. Since there are four measurements along the axes and there are only two scale parameters, it is not possible for all the data along the axes to be scaled to 1.
  35. J. P. Chandler, “stepit,” Quantum Chemistry Program Exchange (Department of Chemistry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind., 1965).
  36. B. A. Wandell, “Color measurement and discrimination,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 62–71 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. G. Wyszecki, W. S. Stiles, Color Science (Wiley, New York, 1982).
  38. M. A. Berkley, F. Kitterle, D. W. Watkins, “Grating visibility as a function of orientation and retinal eccentricity,” Vision Res. 15, 239–244 (1975). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. D. H. Kelly, “Retinal inhomogeneity. I. Spatiotemporal contrast sensitivity,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1, 107–113 (1984). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. D. H. Kelly, “Retinal inhomogeneity. II. Spatiotemporal summation,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1, 107–113 (1984). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. J. Nachmias, R. Sansbury, A. Vassilev, A. Weber, “Adaptation to square-wave gratings: in search of the elusive third harmonic,” Vision Res. 13, 1335–1342 (1973). [CrossRef]
  42. M. W. Greenlee, S. Magnussen, “Higher-harmonic adaptation and the detection of squarewave gratings,” Vision Res. 27, 249–255 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. G. B. Henning, B. G. Hertz, D. E. Broadbent, “Some experiments bearing on the hypothesis that the visual system analyzes patterns in independent bands of spatial frequency,” Vision Res. 15, 887–899 (1975). [CrossRef]
  44. J. Nachmias, B. E. Rogowitz, “Masking by spatially-modulated gratings,” Vision Res. 23, 1621–1630 (1983). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. J. A. Movshon, I. D. Thompson, D. J. Tolhurst, “Receptive field organization of complex cells in the cat’s striate cortex,” J. Physiol. 283, 79–99 (1978).
  46. R. L. DeValois, D. G. Albrecht, L. G. Thorell, “Spatial frequency selectivity of cells in the macaque visual cortex,” Vision Res. 22, 545–559 (1982). [CrossRef]
  47. G. H. Golub, C. F. van Loan, Matrix Computations (Johns Hopkins U. Press, Baltimore, Md., 1983).
  48. J. Dongarra, J. R. Bunch, C. B. Moler, G. W. Stewart, linpack Users Guide (SIAM Publications, Philadelphia, Pa., 1978).

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