OSA's Digital Library

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

| EXPLORING THE INTERFACE OF LIGHT AND BIOMEDICINE

  • Editors: Andrew Dunn and Anthony Durkin
  • Vol. 6, Iss. 9 — Oct. 3, 2011

Orientation gradient detection exhibits variable coupling between first- and second-stage filtering mechanisms

Andrew Isaac Meso and Robert F. Hess  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 28, Issue 8, pp. 1721-1731 (2011)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.28.001721


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (1037 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We investigated sensitivity to orientation modulation using visual stimuli with bandpass filtered noise carriers. We characterized the relationship between the spatial parameters of the modulator and the carrier using a 2-AFC detection task. The relationship between these two parameters is potentially informative of the underlying coupling between first- and second-stage filtering mechanisms, which, in turn, may bear on the interrelationship between striate and extrastriate cortical processing. Our previous experiments on analogous motion stimuli found an optimum sensitivity when the ratio of the carrier and modulator spatial frequency parameters (r) was approximately ten. The current results do not exhibit an optimum sensitivity at a given value of the ratio r. Previous experiments involving second-order modulation sensitivity show an inconsistent range of estimates of optimum sensitivity at values of r between 5 and 50. Our results, using a complementary approach, confirm these discrepancies, demonstrating that the coupling between carrier and modulator frequency parameters depends on a number of stimulus-specific factors, such as contrast sensitivity, stimulus eccentricity, and absolute values of the carrier and modulator spatial frequency parameters. We show that these observations are true for a stimulus limited in eccentricity and that this orientation-modulated stimulus does not exhibit scale invariance. Such processing can not be modeled by a generic filter–rectify–filter model.

© 2011 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(330.5020) Vision, color, and visual optics : Perception psychology
(330.5510) Vision, color, and visual optics : Psychophysics

ToC Category:
Vision, Color, and Visual Optics

History
Original Manuscript: February 15, 2011
Revised Manuscript: June 17, 2011
Manuscript Accepted: June 19, 2011
Published: July 27, 2011

Virtual Issues
Vol. 6, Iss. 9 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
Andrew Isaac Meso and Robert F. Hess, "Orientation gradient detection exhibits variable coupling between first- and second-stage filtering mechanisms," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 28, 1721-1731 (2011)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/vjbo/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-28-8-1721


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. D. Marr, Vision: A Computational Investigation into the Human Representation and Processing of Visual Information (Freeman, 1982). [PubMed]
  2. N. V. S. Graham, Visual Pattern Analyzers (Oxford Univ. Press, 1989). [CrossRef]
  3. F. W. Campbell and J. R. Robson, “Application of Fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings,” J. Physiol. 197, 551–566 (1968). [PubMed]
  4. R. L. DeValois and K. K. DeValois, Spatial Vision (Oxford Univ. Press, 1988).
  5. C. L. Baker, Jr., and I. Mareschal, “Processing of second-order stimuli in the visual cortex,” Prog. Brain Res. 134, 171–191(2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. J. R. Bergen and E. H. Adelson, “Early vision and texture perception,” Nature 333, 363–364 (1988). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. M. S. Landy and J. R. Bergen, “Texture segregation and orientation gradient,” Vision Res. 31, 679–691 (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. A. Sutter, J. Beck, and N. Graham, “Contrast and spatial variables in texture segregation: testing a simple spatial-frequency channels model,” Percept. Psychophys. 46, 312–332(1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. M. R. Turner, “Texture discrimination by Gabor functions,” Biol. Cybern. 55, 71–82 (1986). [PubMed]
  10. H. R. Wilson, V. P. Ferrera, and C. Yo, “A psychophysically motivated model for two-dimensional motion perception,” Visual neuroscience 9, 79–97 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. A. B. Watson and M. P. Eckert, “Motion-contrast sensitivity: visibility of motion gradients of various spatial frequencies,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 496–505 (1994). [CrossRef]
  12. R. F. Hess and L. M. Wilcox, “Linear and nonlinear filtering in stereopsis,” Vision Res. 34, 2431–2438 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. R. L. Devalois, H. Morgan, and D. M. Snodderly, “Psychophysical studies of monkey vision. 3. Spatial luminance contrast sensitivity tests of macaque and human observers,” Vision Res. 14, 75–81 (1974). [CrossRef]
  14. J. H. Jamar and J. J. Koenderink, “Sine-wave gratings: scale invariance and spatial integration at suprathreshold contrast,” Vision Res. 23, 805–810 (1983). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. A. Sutter, G. Sperling, and C. Chubb, “Measuring the spatial frequency selectivity of second-order texture mechanisms,” Vision Res. 35, 915–924 (1995). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. A. J. Schofield and M. A. Georgeson, “Sensitivity to contrast modulation: the spatial frequency dependence of second-order vision,” Vision Res. 43, 243–259 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. A. J. Schofield and M. A. Georgeson, “Sensitivity to modulations of luminance and contrast in visual white noise: separate mechanisms with similar behaviour,” Vision Res. 39, 2697–2716(1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. S. C. Dakin and I. Mareschal, “Sensitivity to contrast modulation depends on carrier spatial frequency and orientation,” Vision Res. 40, 311–329 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. T. Ledgeway and A. T. Smith, “Evidence for separate motion-detecting mechanisms for first- and second-order motion in human vision,” Vision Res. 34, 2727–2740 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. C. Chubb and G. Sperling, “Two motion perception mechanisms revealed through distance-driven reversal of apparent motion,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86, 2985–2989 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. M. S. Landy and I. Oruc, “Properties of second-order spatial frequency channels,” Vision Res. 42, 2311–2329 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. F. A. Kingdom, D. Keeble, and B. Moulden, “Sensitivity to orientation modulation in micropattern-based textures,” Vision Res. 35, 79–91 (1995). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. F. A. Kingdom and D. R. Keeble, “A linear systems approach to the detection of both abrupt and smooth spatial variations in orientation-defined textures,” Vision Res. 36, 409–420 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. F. A. A. Kingdom and D. R. T. Keeble, “On the mechanism for scale invariance in orientation-defined textures,” Vision Res. 39, 1477–1489 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Y. X. Zhou and C. L. Baker, “Spatial properties of envelope-responsive cells in area 17 and 18 neurons of the cat,” J. Neurophysiol. 75, 1038–1050 (1996). [PubMed]
  26. A. I. Meso and R. F. Hess, “Visual motion gradient sensitivity shows scale invariant spatial frequency and speed tuning properties,” Vision Res. 50, 1475–1485 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. D. C. V. Essen and J. H. R. Maunsell, “Hierarchical organization and functional streams in the visual cortex,” Trends Neurosci. 6, 370–375 (1983). [CrossRef]
  28. J. H. Jamar and J. J. Koenderink, “Contrast detection and detection of contrast modulation for noise gratings,” Vision Res. 25, 511–521 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. D. Marr and E.-C. Hildreth, “Theory of edge detection,” Proc. R. Soc. B 207, 187–217 (1980). [CrossRef]
  30. 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]
  31. D. Gabor, “Theory of communication. Part 1: The analysis of information,” J. Inst. Elect. Eng. 93, 429–441 (1946). [CrossRef]
  32. R. J. Snowden, “Orientation bandwidth: the effect of spatial and temporal frequency,” Vision Res. 32, 1965–1974 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. J. P. Thomas and J. Gille, “Bandwidths of orientation channels in human vision,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 69, 652–660 (1979). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. N. Graham, “Non-linearities in texture segregation,” Ciba Found. Symp. 184, 309–322; discussion, 323-338 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. J. R. Bergen and M. S. Landy, “Computational modeling of visual texture segregation,” in Computational Models of Visual Processing, M.S.Landy and J.A.Movshon, eds. (MIT, 1991), pp. 253–271.
  36. D. Sagi, “Detection of an orientation singularity in Gabor textures: effect of signal density and spatial-frequency,” Vision Res. 30, 1377–1388 (1990). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. F. A. Kingdom and D. R. Keeble, “Luminance spatial frequency differences facilitate the segmentation of superimposed textures,” Vision Res. 40, 1077–1087 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. S. C. Dakin, C. B. Williams, and R. F. Hess, “The interaction of first- and second-order cues to orientation,” Vision Res. 39, 2867–2884 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. I. Motoyoshi and S. Y. Nishida, “Cross-orientation summation in texture segregation,” Vision Res. 44, 2567–2576 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. F. A. A. Kingdom and D. R. T. Keeble, “A linear systems approach to the detection of both abrupt and smooth spatial variations in orientation-defined textures,” Vision Res. 36, 409–420 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

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