Detection and contrast discrimination of moving signals in uncorrelated Gaussian noise

We investigate human visual detection and contrast discrimination of a moving Gabor signal in spatiotemporal white noise. We measure performance as a function of signal contrast for detection and contrast discrimination in a 4 alternative forced choice task. Observers were instructed and trained to maintain their gaze on a fixation point at all times during the experiment. The effect of signal contrast on human detection and contrast discrimination performance (d') for a moving signal in spatiotemporal noise is similar to that found for the case of a stationary signal in spatial noise. It can be described by a linear function with a positive x-intercept for detection and a 0 intercept for contrast discrimination. The difference in x-intercepts for the detection and contrast discrimination tasks are consistent with signal uncertainty. The improvement in performance with increasing number of frames is different for the detection and contrast discrimination tasks. Results show performance improvement with number of frames that saturates much later (750 - 800 msec) than would be expected from the early temporal filters (100 - 150 msec). Observers are more efficient detecting a stationary signal than a moving signal (when no eye tracking is allowed) in spatiotemporal noise. In an additional experiment where the signal interframe displacement was increased, observer performance (d') decreased with increasing interframe signal displacements dropping 50% for an interframe displacement of 70 min. of arc showing that human performance for detection of a moving signal is affected by the specific characteristics of the signal motion.

[1]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Lesion detection in structured noise. , 1995, Academic radiology.

[2]  V. Lollo,et al.  Perception of directional sampled motion in relation to displacement and spatial frequency: Evidence for a unitary motion system , 1990, Vision Research.

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

[4]  H H Barrett,et al.  Effect of random background inhomogeneity on observer detection performance. , 1992, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[5]  Edward C. Carterette,et al.  Observer performance in dynamic displays: effect of frame rate on visual signal detection in noisy images , 1991, Electronic Imaging.

[6]  Francis R. Verdun,et al.  Detectability of radiological images: the influence of anatomical noise , 1995, Medical Imaging.

[7]  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.

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

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

[10]  H. Barlow The efficiency of detecting changes of density in random dot patterns , 1978, Vision Research.

[11]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. II. Signal-location identification. , 1984, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[12]  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.

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

[14]  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.

[15]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Effect of additive noise, signal contrast, and feature motion on visual detection in structured noise , 1996, Medical Imaging.

[16]  W. W. Peterson,et al.  The theory of signal detectability , 1954, Trans. IRE Prof. Group Inf. Theory.

[17]  J. Robson,et al.  Probability summation and regional variation in contrast sensitivity across the visual field , 1981, Vision Research.

[18]  C W Thomas,et al.  Model for perception of pulsed fluoroscopy image sequences. , 1994, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[19]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Improving detection of coronary morphological features from digital angiograms. Effect of stenosis-stabilized display. , 1994, Circulation.

[20]  P F Judy,et al.  Detection of noisy visual targets: Models for the effects of spatial uncertainty and signal-to-noise ratio , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[21]  H. Barrett,et al.  Effect of noise correlation on detectability of disk signals in medical imaging. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

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

[23]  M J Tapiovaara Efficiency of low-contrast detail detectability in fluoroscopic imaging. , 1997, Medical physics.

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

[25]  D G Pelli,et al.  Uncertainty explains many aspects of visual contrast detection and discrimination. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[26]  A. Burgess Comparison of receiver operating characteristic and forced choice observer performance measurement methods. , 1995, Medical physics.

[27]  W. A. Wickelgren,et al.  Unidimensional strength theory and component analysis of noise in absolute and comparative judgments , 1968 .

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

[29]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[30]  A Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. III. On Bayesian use of prior knowledge and cross correlation. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.