Frequency tuning of perceptual templates changes with noise magnitude.

Classification-image analysis has proven to be a valuable tool for revealing features used to perform visual tasks in noise. We use this methodology to investigate how the magnitude of noise influences detection mechanisms, and more specifically, to examine whether observers use a consistent perceptual template across noise magnitude as is often assumed in models. The experiments consist of 2AFC detection of a Gaussian target profile in white noise with RMS contrast levels ranging from 1.25% to 20%. Target contrast was manipulated to maintain a performance level of approximately 80% correct at each noise level. The estimated classification images are presented along with a spatial frequency analysis that consists of radial averages of the frequency domain. The resulting frequency weights show significant within-subject differences across noise levels, as do sampling efficiencies derived from these frequency weights. At low levels of external noise, the classification images are attenuated at low spatial frequencies, giving rise to a more bandpass appearance. At high noise levels, the spatial frequency weights have much less low-frequency attenuation, making them closer to an ideal matched filter. Our results provide direct evidence against the notion of a single consistent perceptual template mediating detection across different levels of noise.

[1]  Moshe Gur,et al.  Analysis of responses to drifting and stationary gratings in VI of alert monkey , 2010 .

[2]  H. Wilson A transducer function for threshold and suprathreshold human vision , 1980, Biological Cybernetics.

[3]  M. Eckstein,et al.  Virtual evolution for visual search in natural images results in behavioral receptive fields with inhibitory surrounds , 2009, Visual Neuroscience.

[4]  A J Ahumada,et al.  Equivalent-noise model for contrast detection and discrimination. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[5]  H Ghandeharian,et al.  Visual signal detection. I. Ability to use phase information. , 1984, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[6]  H H Barrett,et al.  Hotelling trace criterion and its correlation with human-observer performance. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[7]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Classification images for simple detection and discrimination tasks in correlated noise. , 2007, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[8]  Richard F Murray,et al.  Optimal methods for calculating classification images: weighted sums. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[9]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Classification image analysis: estimation and statistical inference for two-alternative forced-choice experiments. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[10]  M F Bradshaw,et al.  Do Monocular Tilt and Spatial Frequency Aftereffects Induce the Binocular Perception of Inclination and Slant? , 1996 .

[11]  T. Birdsall The Theory of Signal Detectability: ROC Curves and Their Character , 1966 .

[12]  Joshua A Solomon,et al.  Noise reveals visual mechanisms of detection and discrimination. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[13]  Albert J. Ahumada,et al.  Technique to extract relevant image features for visual tasks , 1998, Electronic Imaging.

[14]  Frédéric Gosselin,et al.  Bubbles: a technique to reveal the use of information in recognition tasks , 2001, Vision Research.

[15]  Duane Q Nykamp,et al.  Full identification of a linear-nonlinear system via cross-correlation analysis. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[16]  G. Legge,et al.  Contrast discrimination in noise. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[17]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Adaptive detection mechanisms in globally statistically nonstationary-oriented noise. , 2006, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[18]  A. Ahumada,et al.  Stimulus Features in Signal Detection , 1971 .

[19]  H H Barrett,et al.  Objective assessment of image quality: effects of quantum noise and object variability. , 1990, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[20]  Z L Lu,et al.  Characterizing the spatial-frequency sensitivity of perceptual templates. , 2001, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[21]  James H. Elder,et al.  Contrast dependence of spatial summation revealed by classification image analysis , 2004 .

[22]  N. Nagaraja,et al.  Effect of Luminance Noise on Contrast Thresholds , 1964 .

[23]  P. Schyns,et al.  Show Me the Features! Understanding Recognition From the Use of Visual Information , 2002, Psychological science.

[24]  Philip F. Judy,et al.  Lesion detection and signal–to–noise ratio in CT images , 1981 .

[25]  S. Klein,et al.  Measuring, estimating, and understanding the psychometric function: A commentary , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[26]  H. Kundel,et al.  The influence of structured noise on the detection of radiologic abnormalities. , 1974, Investigative radiology.

[27]  P. Bennett,et al.  Deriving behavioural receptive fields for visually completed contours , 2000, Current Biology.

[28]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. II. Effects of contrast gain control, background variations, and white noise. , 1997, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[29]  A. C. Bovik,et al.  Eye movements selective for spatial frequency and orientation during active visual search , 2009, Vision Research.

[30]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Fractal-Based Description of Natural Scenes , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[31]  J. M. Foley,et al.  Contrast detection and near-threshold discrimination in human vision , 1981, Vision Research.

[32]  J. L. Harris Resolving Power and Decision Theory , 1964 .

[33]  Richard F Murray,et al.  Classification images predict absolute efficiency. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[34]  H. Wilson,et al.  Spatial frequency tuning of orientation selective units estimated by oblique masking , 1983, Vision Research.

[35]  R Marken,et al.  Time and frequency analyses of auditory signal detection. , 1975, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Model observers for assessment of image quality , 1993 .

[37]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Classification images for detection, contrast discrimination, and identification tasks with a common ideal observer. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[38]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detectability with two noise components: anomalous masking effects. , 1997, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[39]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Modeling Visual Detection Tasks in Correlated Image Noise with Linear Model Observers , 2000 .

[40]  B. Dosher,et al.  Characterizing observers using external noise and observer models: assessing internal representations with external noise. , 2008, Psychological review.

[41]  J A Solomon,et al.  Channel selection with non-white-noise masks. , 2000, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[42]  B. Julesz,et al.  Spatial-frequency masking in vision: critical bands and spread of masking. , 1972, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[43]  Theodore G. Birdsall,et al.  Definitions of d′ and η as Psychophysical Measures , 1958 .

[44]  D. Pelli,et al.  The role of spatial frequency channels in letter identification , 2002, Vision Research.

[45]  D G Pelli,et al.  Why use noise? , 1999, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[46]  A J Ahumada,et al.  Putting the visual system noise back in the picture. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[47]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Unified SNR analysis of medical imaging systems , 1985, Physics in medicine and biology.

[48]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Optimal shifted estimates of human-observer templates in two-alternative forced-choice experiments , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[49]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. IV. Observer inconsistency. , 1988, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[50]  A. Burgess Statistically defined backgrounds: performance of a modified nonprewhitening observer model. , 1994, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[51]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Efficiency of human visual signal discrimination. , 1981, Science.

[52]  Denis G. Pelli Vision: coding and efficiency , 1990 .

[53]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Limited flexibility in the filter underlying saccadic targeting , 2007, Vision Research.

[54]  Denis G. Pelli,et al.  The visual filter mediating letter identification , 1994, Nature.

[55]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  Laminar cortical mechanisms for the perception of slanted and curved 3-D surfaces and their 2-D pictorical projections , 2010 .

[56]  Philip J. Kellman,et al.  Classification images reveal interpolation in dynamic displays , 2010 .

[57]  B. Dosher,et al.  External noise distinguishes attention mechanisms , 1998, Vision Research.

[58]  A. Ahumada Perceptual Classification Images from Vernier Acuity Masked by Noise , 1996 .

[59]  Colin Blakemore,et al.  Vision: Coding and Efficiency , 1991 .

[60]  M. Landy,et al.  Noise masking reveals channels for second-order letters , 2006, Vision Research.

[61]  D J Field,et al.  Relations between the statistics of natural images and the response properties of cortical cells. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.