Propagation of photon noise and information transfer in visual motion detection

The extraction of the direction of motion from the time varying retinal images is one of the most basic tasks any visual system is confronted with. However, retinal images are severely corrupted by photon noise, in particular at low light levels, thus limiting the performance of motion detection mechanisms of what sort so ever. Here, we study how photon noise propagates through an array of Reichardt-type motion detectors that are commonly believed to underlie fly motion vision. We provide closed-form analytical expressions of the signal and noise spectra at the output of such a motion detector array. We find that Reichardt detectors reveal favorable noise suppression in the frequency range where most of the signal power resides. Most notably, due to inherent adaptive properties, the transmitted information about stimulus velocity remains nearly constant over a large range of velocity entropies.

[1]  W. Bialek,et al.  RELIABILITY AND STATISTICAL EFFICIENCY OF A BLOWFLY MOVEMENT-SENSITIVE NEURON , 1995 .

[2]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[3]  Martina Medkovatt,et al.  Fly motion vision is based on Reichardt detectors regardless of the signal-to-noise ratio , 2004 .

[4]  S B Laughlin,et al.  Matched filtering by a photoreceptor membrane , 1996, Vision Research.

[5]  A. Borst,et al.  Adaptation of response transients in fly motion vision. I: Experiments , 2003, Vision Research.

[6]  W. Reichardt,et al.  Autocorrelation, a principle for the evaluation of sensory information by the central nervous system , 1961 .

[7]  A. Andreou,et al.  A communication channel model for information transmission in the blowfly photoreceptor. , 2001, Bio Systems.

[8]  Athanasios Papoulis,et al.  Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Processes , 1965 .

[9]  C. Koch,et al.  The analysis of visual motion: from computational theory to neuronal mechanisms. , 1986, Annual review of neuroscience.

[10]  A. Borst,et al.  Adaptation of response transients in fly motion vision. II: Model studies , 2003, Vision Research.

[11]  A. Norcia,et al.  Neural noise limitations on infant visual sensitivity , 1998, Nature.

[12]  H. Sompolinsky,et al.  Adaptation without parameter change: Dynamic gain control in motion detection , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  F. A. Miles,et al.  Visual Motion and Its Role in the Stabilization of Gaze , 1992 .

[14]  G D Lewen,et al.  Neural coding of naturalistic motion stimuli , 2001, Network.

[15]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Elements of Information Theory , 2005 .

[16]  A. Mircea,et al.  Distortion noise in frequency-dependent nonlinear networks , 1969 .

[17]  J. Limb,et al.  Estimating the Velocity of Moving Images in Television Signals , 1975 .

[18]  Alexander Borst,et al.  Principles of visual motion detection , 1989, Trends in Neurosciences.

[19]  A. Borst,et al.  Encoding of Visual Motion Information and Reliability in Spiking and Graded Potential Neurons , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[20]  A. Borst,et al.  Active Membrane Properties and Signal Encoding in Graded Potential Neurons , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[21]  J. Movshon,et al.  The statistical reliability of signals in single neurons in cat and monkey visual cortex , 1983, Vision Research.

[22]  A. Borst,et al.  Detecting visual motion: theory and models. , 1993, Reviews of oculomotor research.

[23]  Holger G. Krapp,et al.  Arrangement of optical axes and spatial resolution in the compound eye of the female blowfly Calliphora , 2000, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[24]  Claude L. Fennema,et al.  Velocity determination in scenes containing several moving objects , 1979 .

[25]  Werner Reichardt,et al.  Evaluation of optical motion information by movement detectors , 1987, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[26]  Alexander Borst,et al.  Noise, Not Stimulus Entropy, Determines Neural Information Rate , 2004, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[27]  Karl Geokg Götz,et al.  Optomotorische Untersuchung des visuellen systems einiger Augenmutanten der Fruchtfliege Drosophila , 1964, Kybernetik.

[28]  Simon B. Laughlin,et al.  Form and function in retinal processing , 1987, Trends in Neurosciences.

[29]  H. A. K. Mastebroek,et al.  The computational measurement of apparent motion: A recurrent pattern recognition strategy as an approach to solve the correspondence problem , 1990, Biological Cybernetics.

[30]  J. H. van Hateren,et al.  Real and optimal neural images in early vision , 1992, Nature.

[31]  Adrian C. Melissinos.  Principles of modern technology: The power spectrum , 1990 .

[32]  Martin Egelhaaf,et al.  Impact of Photon Noise on the Reliability of a Motion-Sensitive Neuron in the Fly's Visual System , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[33]  Barbara Blakeslee,et al.  The intracellular pupil mechanism and photoreceptor signal: noise ratios in the fly Lucilia cuprina , 1987, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[34]  W. Bialek,et al.  Statistical mechanics and visual signal processing , 1994, cond-mat/9401072.

[35]  E. Buchner.  Elementary movement detectors in an insect visual system , 1976, Biological Cybernetics.

[36]  Huxley Af,et al.  A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. 1952. , 1990 .

[37]  M. Srinivasan.  Generalized gradient schemes for the measurement of two-dimensional image motion , 1990, Biological Cybernetics.