Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Bart Farell

Publications and source records attributed to Bart Farell.

14 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Orientation-specific computation in stereoscopic vision.

The left and right eyes receive subtly different images from a visual scene. Binocular disparities of retinal image locations are correlated with variation in the depth of objects in the scene and make stereoscopic depth perception possible. Disparity stereoscopically specifies a stimulus; changing the stimulus in a way that conserves its disparity leaves the stimulus stereoscopically unchanged. Therefore, a person's ability to use stereo to see the depth separating any two objects should depend only on the disparities of the objects, which in turn depend on where the objects are, not what they are. However, I find that the disparity difference between two stimuli by itself predicts neither stereoacuity nor perceived depth. Human stereo vision is shown here to be most sensitive at detecting the relative depth of two gratings when they are parallel. Rotating one grating by as little as 10 degrees lowers sensitivity. The rotation can make a perceptible depth separation invisible, although it changes neither the relative nor absolute disparities of the gratings, only their relative orientations. The effect of relative orientation is not confined to stimuli that, like gratings, vary along one dimension or to stimuli perceived to have a dominant orientation. Rather, it is the relative orientation of the one-dimensional components of stimuli, even broadband stimuli, that matters. This limit on stereoscopic depth perception appears to be intrinsic to the visual system's computation of disparity; by taking place within orientation bands, the computation renders the coding of disparity inseparable from the coding of orientation.

Depth Perception↗
PubMed2006

Feature detection and letter identification.

Seeking to understand how people recognize objects, we have examined how they identify letters. We expected this 26-way classification of familiar forms to challenge the popular notion of independent feature detection ("probability summation"), but find instead that this theory parsimoniously accounts for our results. We measured the contrast required for identification of a letter briefly presented in visual noise. We tested a wide range of alphabets and scripts (English, Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, Devanagari, Hebrew, and several artificial ones), three- and five-letter words, and various type styles, sizes, contrasts, durations, and eccentricities, with observers ranging widely in age (3 to 68) and experience (none to fluent). Foreign alphabets are learned quickly. In just three thousand trials, new observers attain the same proficiency in letter identification as fluent readers. Surprisingly, despite this training, the observers-like clinical letter-by-letter readers-have the same meager memory span for random strings of these characters as observers seeing them for the first time. We compare performance across tasks and stimuli that vary in difficulty by pitting the human against the ideal observer, and expressing the results as efficiency. We find that efficiency for letter identification is independent of duration, overall contrast, and eccentricity, and only weakly dependent on size, suggesting that letters are identified by a similar computation across this wide range of viewing conditions. Efficiency is also independent of age and years of reading. However, efficiency does vary across alphabets and type styles, with more complex forms yielding lower efficiencies, as one might expect from Gestalt theories of perception. In fact, we find that efficiency is inversely proportional to perimetric complexity (perimeter squared over "ink" area) and nearly independent of everything else. This, and the surprisingly fixed ratio of detection and identification thresholds, indicate that identifying a letter is mediated by detection of about 7 visual features.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Motion in depth from interocular velocity differences revealed by differential motion aftereffect.

There are two possible binocular mechanisms for the detection of motion in depth. One is based on disparity changes over time and the other is based on interocular velocity differences. It has previously been shown that disparity changes over time can produce the perception of motion in depth. However, existing psychophysical and physiological data are inconclusive as to whether interocular velocity differences play a role in motion in depth perception. We studied this issue using the motion aftereffect, the illusory motion of static patterns that follows adaptation to real motion. We induced a differential motion aftereffect to the two eyes and then tested for motion in depth in a stationary random-dot pattern seen with both eyes. It has been shown previously that a differential translational motion aftereffect produces a strong perception of motion in depth. We show here that a rotational motion aftereffect inhibits this perception of motion in depth, even though a real rotation induces motion in depth. A non-horizontal translational motion aftereffect did not inhibit motion in depth. Together, our results strongly suggest that (1) pure interocular velocity differences can produce motion in depth, and (2) the illusory changes in position from the motion aftereffect are generated relatively late in the visual hierarchy, after binocular combination.

Adaptation, Psychological↗
PubMed2005

A reversed structure-from-motion effect for simultaneously viewed stereo-surfaces.

A spatially flat stimulus is perceived as varying in depth if its velocity structure is consistent with that of a three-dimensional (3D) object. This is structure from motion (SFM). We asked if the converse effect also exists. A motion-from-structure effect would skew an object's perceived velocity structure to make it more consistent with the 3D structure provided by its depth cues. This proposed phenomenon should be opposite in sign from velocity constancy and could potentially interfere with it. Previous tests of velocity constancy compared stimuli presented at different times, not simultaneously. This explains why a reversal of SFM has not been previously reported, as it is expected to appear only for simultaneous presentations. We tested this prediction using random-dot stereograms to define two adjacent moving surfaces separated in stereoscopic depth. We found that subjects did not perceive velocity constancy with either simultaneous or sequential stimulus presentations. For sequential presentations, subjects matched retinal speeds, in agreement with previous work. However, for simultaneous presentations, the nearer surface was seen as moving faster when both surfaces were moving with the same retinal speed, an effect opposite in polarity from velocity constancy and a signature of the motion-from-structure phenomenon.

Calibration↗
PubMed2005

Stereo sensitivity depends on stereo matching.

Stereoacuity thresholds, measured with bar targets, rise as the absolute disparity of the bars is increased. One explanation for this rise is that, as the bars are moved away from the fixation plane, the stereo system uses coarser mechanisms to encode the bars' disparity; coarse mechanisms are insensitive to small changes in target disparity, resulting in higher thresholds. To test this explanation, we measured stereoacuity with a 6 degrees wide 3 cpd grating presented in a rectangular envelope. We varied the disparity of the grating and its edges (envelope) parametrically from 0 to 20 arcmin (i.e., through one full period). To force observers to make judgments based on carrier disparity, we then varied the interocular phase incrementally from trial-to-trial while keeping edge disparity fixed for a given block of trials. The pedestal phase disparity of the grating necessarily cycles through 360 degrees, back to zero disparity, as the edge disparity increases monotonically from 0 to 20 arcmin. Unlike mechanisms that respond to bars, the mechanism that responds to the interocular phase disparity of the grating should have the same sensitivity at 20 arcmin disparity (360 degrees of phase) as it has at zero disparity. So, if stereoacuity were determined by the most sensitive mechanism, thresholds should oscillate with the pedestal phase disparity. However, these gratings are perceived in depth at the disparity of their edges. If stereoacuity were instead determined by the stereo matching operations that generate perceived depth, thresholds should rise monotonically with increasing edge disparity. We found that the rise in grating thresholds with increasing edge disparity was monotonic and virtually identical to the rise in thresholds observed for bars. Stereoacuity is contingent on stereo matching.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Seeing motion in depth using inter-ocular velocity differences.

An object moving in depth produces retinal images that change in position over time by different amounts in the two eyes. This allows stereoscopic perception of motion in depth to be based on either one or both of two different visual signals: inter-ocular velocity differences, and binocular disparity change over time. Disparity change over time can produce the perception of motion in depth. However, demonstrating the same for inter-ocular velocity differences has proved elusive because of the difficulty of isolating this cue from disparity change (the inverse can easily be done). No physiological data are available, and existing psychophysical data are inconclusive as to whether inter-ocular velocity differences are used in primate vision. Here, we use motion adaptation to assess the contribution of inter-ocular velocity differences to the perception of motion in depth. If inter-ocular velocity differences contribute to motion in depth, we would expect that discriminability of direction of motion in depth should be improved after adaptation to frontoparallel motion. This is because an inter-ocular velocity difference is a comparison between two monocular frontoparallel motion signals, and because frontoparallel speed discrimination improves after motion adaptation. We show that adapting to frontoparallel motion does improve both frontoparallel speed discrimination and motion-in-depth direction discrimination. No improvement would be expected if only disparity change over time contributes to motion in depth. Furthermore, we found that frontoparallel motion adaptation diminishes discrimination of both speed and direction of motion in depth in dynamic random dot stereograms, in which changing disparity is the only cue available. The results provide strong evidence that inter-ocular velocity differences contribute to the perception of motion in depth and thus that the human visual system contains mechanisms for detecting differences in velocity between the two eyes' retinal images.

Adaptation, Physiological↗
PubMed2004

Influence of target size and luminance on the White-Todorovic effect.

Variants of a lightness effect described by [Todorovic's, D. (1997). Lightness and junctions. Perception, 26, 379] were studied to quantify the failure of lightness constancy as a function of target luminance and target size. Todorovic's effect is similar to White's effect. Simultaneous lightness contrast appears to operate selectively between stimuli belonging to the same perceptual group, and not between stimuli of equal proximity belonging to different perceptual groups. We found that mid-gray targets grouped with a white contextual stimulus were matched on average to a darker-than-veridical gray. Those grouped with a black contextual stimulus were matched on average veridically. This is consistent with 'anchoring' effects observed in simple two-stimulus displays. However, target luminance had an effect that was not captured by mid-level target luminance data or data averaged across target luminances. For both white and black contextual stimuli, light-gray targets were matched to a darker-than-veridical gray and the direction of this error shifted toward the lighter-than-veridical direction as the luminance of the target was lowered. The result was a constant difference between the perceived lightnesses of targets presented with white and black contextual stimuli. Target size had no effect on perceived lightness. These data imply that the Todorovic-White effect can be characterized as lightness assimilation rather than as lightness contrast. By accounting for compression as well as the Todorovic-White effect, assimilation is the more general explanation.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

What is the depth of a sinusoidal grating?

Stereo matching of a textured surface is, in principle, ambiguous because of the quasi-repetitive nature of texture. Here, we used a perfectly repetitive texture, namely a sinusoidal grating, to examine human stereo matching for repetitive patterns. Observers matched the depth of a vertical grating segment, 6-deg wide and presented in a rectangular envelope at or near the disparity of the segment edges. The interocular phase of the carrier also influenced stereo matching, producing shifts in depth arrayed around the plane specified by the edges. The limiting disparity for the edge matches was 40-60 arcmin, independent of the spatial frequency of the carrier. One explanation for these results is that first-order disparity energy mechanisms, tuned to lower spatial frequencies, respond to the edge disparities, while showing little response to the interocular phase of the carrier. In principle, these first-order low frequency mechanisms could account for edge-based stereo matching at high contrasts. But, edge matching is also observed at carrier contrasts as low as 5%, where these low frequency mechanisms are unlikely to detect the grating stimulus. This result suggests that edge matching for gratings depends on coarse-scale second-order stereo mechanisms, similar to the second-order mechanisms that have been proposed for encoding two-dimensional texture. We conclude that stereo matching of gratings (or any other texture) depends on a combination of responses in both coarse-scale second-order and fine-scale first-order disparity mechanisms.

Contrast Sensitivity↗
PubMed2004

Coarse scales, fine scales, and their interactions in stereo vision.

Human stereo vision can resolve remarkably small depth differences between two stimuli, but the smallest resolvable difference is usually that between stimuli located near the plane of fixation. As distance from this plane increases, so does the smallest detectable increment in disparity. We examined this loss of resolution by comparing disparity discrimination thresholds for single-scale and multi-scale stimuli as a function of the pedestal disparity. For single-scale gratings, disparity thresholds display phase constancy; thus, their spatial thresholds vary reciprocally with grating spatial frequency. For multi-scale gratings, with components separated in frequency by two or three octaves, disparity thresholds display two types of interaction between coarse-scale and fine-scale components: facilitation when pedestal disparities are moderate and interference when they are large. The facilitation extends the disparity range that yields the low thresholds associated with fine-scale components, limiting the loss of disparity resolution for multi-scale stimuli.

Contrast Sensitivity↗
PubMed2004

Seeing depth coherence and transparency.

Gratings with different disparities are sometimes seen as transparent surfaces, each with a distinct depth, when they are superimposed, and sometimes they are seen as a coherent plaid confined to a single depth plane--stereo analogs of transparent and coherent motion. Briefly presented sinusoidal gratings of similar spatial frequencies are seen to cohere in depth. The resulting plaid generally appears in a depth plane different from that of either component grating viewed separately; the plaid may even appear on the oppose side of fixation from the component gratings. Under similar viewing conditions, squarewave gratings are typically seen as transparent. Objective measures, gathered here using depth-order discriminations, show that the perception of transparency between squarewave gratings requires a minimum disparity difference that varies with the gratings' orientations. Gratings that are near orthogonal in orientation, or that give the plaid a near-horizontal disparity, favor the perception of coherence. Gratings that form a plaid having a large ratio of vertical to horizontal disparities favor the perception of transparency. The data are consistent with a Bayesian prior favoring single surfaces when disparities are small and near-horizontal. Disparities that are large or non-horizontal are more likely to be aperture disparities that result from viewing separate but overlapping surfaces. The sinewave-squarewave difference leads to the conclusion that coherence between components is required both for seeing a broadband pattern in a single depth plane and for seeing it in a different depth plane from other superimposed patterns.

Cues↗
PubMed2004

Disparity increment thresholds for gratings.

The classic increment disparity threshold function rises steeply, usually exponentially, with disparity pedestal. Thus a smaller difference in stereoscopic depth can be resolved the nearer it is to the fixation plane. This result has been obtained with relatively broad-bandwidth stimuli. We show here that the increment threshold function for narrow-bandwidth stimuli differs subtly from the classic function: Thresholds vary only modestly over a +/- quarter-cycle pedestal range, by a factor of about 2, and frequently show a dip, yielding best stereo acuity not at the fixation plane but at moderate disparities (20 degrees-30 degrees in phase) on either side of it. Though the dip has not been noted previously, it is consistent with models of disparity processing in which filter sensitivity or selectivity is greatest at a disparity of zero. Moreover, the relatively flat increment threshold function observed at any one scale is compatible with a steeply rising function for broad-bandwidth stimuli.

Depth Perception↗
PubMed2003

The remarkable inefficiency of word recognition.

Do we recognize common objects by parts, or as wholes? Holistic recognition would be efficient, yet people detect a grating of light and dark stripes by parts. Thus efficiency falls as the number of stripes increases, in inverse proportion, as explained by probability summation among independent feature detectors. It is inefficient to detect correlated components independently. But gratings are uncommon artificial stimuli that may fail to tap the full power of visual object recognition. Familiar objects become special as people become expert at judging them, possibly because the processing becomes more holistic. Letters and words were designed to be easily recognized, and, through a lifetime of reading, our visual system presumably has adapted to do this as well as it possibly can. Here we show that in identifying familiar English words, even the five most common three-letter words, observers have the handicap predicted by recognition by parts: a word is unreadable unless its letters are separately identifiable. Efficiency is inversely proportional to word length, independent of how many possible words (5, 26 or thousands) the test word is drawn from. Human performance never exceeds that attainable by strictly letter- or feature-based models. Thus, everything seen is a pattern of features. Despite our virtuosity at recognizing patterns and our expertise from reading a billion letters, we never learn to see a word as a feature; our efficiency is limited by the bottleneck of having to rigorously and independently detect simple features.

Contrast Sensitivity↗
PubMed2003

Detecting disparity in two-dimensional patterns.

One can measure the disparities between two retinal images in several different ways. Experiments were conducted to identify the measure that is invariant at the threshold for detecting the disparity of two-dimensional patterns. The patterns used were stereo plaids, which permit a partial dissociation between the disparity of the pattern and the disparities of its one-dimensional components. For plaids with near-horizontal disparities, thresholds are limited by a disparity phase shift equal to the threshold phase shift for single gratings. For non-horizontal disparities, thresholds are elevated, yet are still phase-limited. In no disparity direction are thresholds for detecting disparity determined by the spatial extent of the plaids' disparity. Effects of the number and the orientation of components with task-relevant disparities indicate that plaid thresholds are limited by the disparity of the plaid's one-dimensional components. No evidence was found that these components form any higher-order pattern that can be used in detecting disparity. Oblique and near-vertical disparities generate elevated thresholds at a stage beyond component disparity detection. This second stage combines component disparities, which are ambiguous about depth, into pattern disparities capable of supporting veridical depth perception.

Humans↗