Invariant features of contrast detection: an explanation in terms of self-similar detector arrays.

Human-detection performance for extended spatial contrasts appears to be subjected to several invariants. Such invariant features put general constraints on possible mechanistic interpretations. We show that the hypothesis of scale invariance is sufficient to determine the distribution of elementary sample apertures (receptive field centers) with respect to aperture size. The hypothesis that the elementary sample apertures are virtually identical except for size, which is augmented with general functional forms for pooling of elementary responses and coding properties for the elementary samples, suffices to derive the phenomenological facts. Because of the division of labor among units of different size, the concept of line-spread function loses a physiologically clear interpretation.

[1]  J. Robson,et al.  Application of fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings , 1968, The Journal of physiology.

[2]  M E Wilson,et al.  Invariant features of spatial summation with changing locus in the visual field , 1970, The Journal of physiology.

[3]  C. Enroth-Cugell,et al.  Flux, not retinal illumination, is what cat retinal ganglion cells really care about , 1973, The Journal of physiology.

[4]  J. McCann,et al.  Visibility of continuous luminance gradients. , 1974, Vision research.

[5]  F A Bilsen,et al.  The influence of the number of cycles upon the visual contrast threshold for spatial sine wave patterns. , 1974, Vision research.

[6]  D. Hubel,et al.  Uniformity of monkey striate cortex: A parallel relationship between field size, scatter, and magnification factor , 1974, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[7]  Quick Rf A vector-magnitude model of contrast detection. , 1974 .

[8]  J. McCann,et al.  Visibility of low-spatial-frequency sine-wave targets: Dependence on number of cycles. , 1975, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[9]  C. J. Keemink,et al.  Gradient detection and contrast transfer by the human eye , 1976, Vision Research.

[10]  G. A. Hay,et al.  A model of visual threshold detection. , 1977, Journal of theoretical biology.

[11]  N. Graham Visual detection of aperiodic spatial stimuli by probability summation among narrowband channels , 1977, Vision Research.

[12]  M. A. Bouman,et al.  Perimetry of contrast detection thresholds of moving spatial sine wave patterns. III. The target extent as a sensitivity controlling parameter. , 1978, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[13]  J. McCann,et al.  Visibility of low-frequency sine-wave targets: Dependence on number of cycles and surround parameters , 1978, Vision Research.

[14]  J. Bergen,et al.  A four mechanism model for threshold spatial vision , 1979, Vision Research.

[15]  D. H. Kelly Motion and vision. II. Stabilized spatio-temporal threshold surface. , 1979, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[16]  J. J. Koenderink,et al.  Spatial summation for complex bar patterns , 1980, Vision Research.

[17]  J J Koenderink,et al.  Influence of the target size on the deterction threshold for luminance and chromaticity contrast. , 1980, Journal of the Optical Society of America.