Showing papers by "David Regan published in 1986"

Necessary conditions for the perception of motion in depth.

Abstract: This study investigated the relation between the perception of motion in depth and ocular vergence movements for a single foveally viewed dot, and for a 30 deg X 30 deg pattern of many dots. When the target's disparity was changed, it appeared to move in depth relative to stationary reference marks, but removing the reference marks completely abolished the sensation of motion in depth for the multi-dot target and left only a weak sensation of motion in depth for the single dot target. However, it is not the case that motion-in-depth sensation per se depends on the presence of reference marks; motion in depth generated by changing-size stimulation was unaffected by removing reference marks. Possible explanations for the loss of motion-in-depth sensation include ocular vergence exactly tracked stimulus motion; vergence changes and disparity changes, though unequal, produced equal and opposite motion-in-depth signals; vergence changes, though producing no motion-in-depth signals, suppressed the signals produced by disparity changes; motion-in-depth sensation requires relative motion. Explanation is rejected because vergence tracking errors were large. Explanation is rejected because vergence changes do not in themselves induce a sensation of motion in depth. Explanation is rejected because motion-in-depth threshold is not affected by vergence changes. Conclusions are as follows. For a single-dot target, visual sensitivity to motion in depth is much higher for changes in relative retinal disparity than for changes in absolute retinal disparity, while for a multi-dot target any residual sensitivity is abolished by an interaction between neighboring coherently moving dots. The authors suggest that the relative velocity elements proposed to explain sensitivity to changing size feed the stereomotion mechanism also.

Visual field defects for vergence eye movements and for stereomotion perception.

Abstract: An objective visual field can be mapped in terms of stimulus-induced eye movement. The authors used the scleral coil technique to record vergence and conjugate eye movements while stimulating different visual field locations with a 3 X 3 deg target whose image vergence was oscillated. For each of three subjects tested there was a visual field location where vergence eye movements were much weaker than in a control location of equal retinal eccentricity. On the other hand, conjugate eye movements driven from these two locations by lateral motion were similar. Field defects for ocular vergence coincided with regions in which oscillating retinal disparity failed to produce a sensation of motion in depth, although visual responses to static disparity were normal, and psychophysical thresholds for lateral motion showed no defect with either binocular or monocular viewing. It was concluded, therefore, that the perceptual stereomotion scotomata were not due to a monocular loss, but to a defective binocular interaction between motion signals from the left and right eyes, and that this defective interaction was specific for opposed rather than parallel motion in the two eyes. Furthermore, the visual loss was specific for motion rather than for position. The correlation between the field defects for ocular vergence and stereomotion perception leads the authors to suggest that the same defect in binocular interaction is responsible for both the eye movement and sensory abnormalities. Two candidate hypotheses are proposed: one is framed in terms of a single population, and the other in terms of two populations of cortical neurons.

Human ocular vergence movements induced by changing size and disparity

Abstract: Human subjects viewed an electronically generated bright square. Horizontal movements of the two eyes were recorded with the scleral coil method. The dynamic properties of vergence movements induced by movement of the bright square were investigated for the following three kinds of stimulus motion: (a) both the size and the binocular disparity of the square changed together, in such a way as to exactly mimic the retinal image changes produced by a real object's motion in depth; (b) the changing-size component in (a) was present with no disparity component; (c) the changing-disparity component in (a) was present with no size component. The gain and phase of the ocular vergence responses to these three stimuli were computed. Ocular vergence movements were induced by changing size in all five subjects. Responses during binocular viewing were higher and less variable than responses during monocular viewing. Size oscillations induced ocular vergence oscillations with a phase lead of up to 65 deg relative to target size for frequencies of stimulation below 1.0 Hz. Vergence oscillation amplitudes were of the order of 10 min of arc and maximal for frequencies of 0.4-0.7 Hz. Ocular vergence movements were not induced by changes in target size in one dimension nor by flickering a stationary square. Ocular vergence movements induced by size changes were entirely transient with no sustained component: vergence responses to disparity were sustained. When the stimulus combined size change with disparity change in the ratio characteristic of a real moving object, vergence tracking was more accurate and less noisy than when the eyes were stimulated with the disparity component alone. The ocular vergence response induced by the combination of size change with disparity change was accurately predicted by linearly adding the vergence response produced by the size change alone to the vergence response produced by the disparity change alone: combined stimulation produced no evidence of non-linear interaction between responses to size change and to disparity change. The properties of vergence responses induced by changing size and by changing disparity showed several close correlations with the corresponding data on psychophysical sensitivity for motion-in-depth sensation. We suggest that responses to changing size contribute to the accuracy with which ocular vergence tracks real objects moving in depth.

Form from motion parallax and form from luminance contrast: vernier discrimination.

Abstract: Some objects are perfectly camouflaged when stationary, but are clearly visible when moving; the boundaries of such an object are defined entirely by motion parallax. Little is known about the eye's ability to make spatial discriminations between motion-defined objects. In this study, subjects viewed a pseudorandom pattern of dots within which a camouflaged bar was made visible by relative motion of dots. Vernier acuity for the motion-defined bar was 27-45 sec arc for three subjects, much less than the interdot separation of 360 sec arc, much less than the 2 deg receptive field size for motion, and comparable with the foveal intercone separation of 30 sec arc. It is proposed that an opponent-orientation process and an opponent-position process can both contribute to vernier judgements for motion-defined objects. Real-world motion contrast commonly confounds the following cues for figure-ground segregation: (1) different texture velocities on either side of the figure's boundary; (2) in any given time interval, texture in figure and ground moves different distances; and (3) texture continually appears and disappears along the figure's boundary. When cues (2) and (3) were eliminated, thus ensuring figure-ground segregation was achieved entirely by motion-sensitive neural elements, vernier acuity was 44 ± 5 sec arc compared with 36 ± 8 sec arc for a dotted bar defined by luminance contrast. Conclusion: Vernier acuity for a dotted bar whose boundary was defined entirely by motion-sensitive neural elements was similar to vernier acuity for a dotted bar whose boundary was defined by luminance contrast.

Systems approach in vision : proceedings of a workshop held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 27-29 August 1984

Abstract: (partial) Foreword. Systems analysis of spatial vision. An essay in honour of Professor L H van der Tweel, G Westheimer. Recent advances in retinex theory, E H Land. Higher order colour mechanisms, J Krauskopf et al. Electrical feedback mechanism in the processing of signals in the outer plexiform layer of the retina, A L Byzov & T M Shura Bura. The importance of contrast for the activity of single neurons, the VEP and perception, R Shapley. Anatomical and physiological asymmetries related to visual areas V3 and VP in macaque extrastriate cortex, A Burkhalter et al. Why have multiple cortical areas?, H B Barlow. The systems approach to the oculomotor system, D A Robinson. The need for an eclectic, rather than systems, approach to the study of the primate oculomotor system, R M Steinman. Processing of optical information by the visual systems of the fly, W Reichardt. Visual processing of four kinds of relative motion, D Regan. Recovering motion information from luminance, S Anstis. Optic flow, J J Koenderink. Visual motion ambiguity, H C Longuet-Higgins. Temporal frequency-dependent VEP changes in Parkinson's Disease, M Marx et al.