General Validity of Levelt's Propositions Reveals Common Computational Mechanisms for Visual Rivalry

The mechanisms underlying conscious visual perception are often studied with either binocular rivalry or perceptual rivalry stimuli. Despite existing research into both types of rivalry, it remains unclear to what extent their underlying mechanisms involve common computational rules. Computational models of binocular rivalry mechanisms are generally tested against Levelt's four propositions, describing the psychophysical relation between stimulus strength and alternation dynamics in binocular rivalry. Here we use a bistable rotating structure-from-motion sphere, a generally studied form of perceptual rivalry, to demonstrate that Levelt's propositions also apply to the alternation dynamics of perceptual rivalry. Importantly, these findings suggest that bistability in structure-from-motion results from active cross-inhibition between neural populations with computational principles similar to those present in binocular rivalry. Thus, although the neural input to the computational mechanism of rivalry may stem from different cortical neurons and different cognitive levels the computational principles just prior to the production of visual awareness appear to be common to the two types of rivalry.

[1]  G. Brouwer,et al.  Endogenous influences on perceptual bistability depend on exogenous stimulus characteristics , 2006, Vision Research.

[2]  M. Lankheet,et al.  Unraveling adaptation and mutual inhibition in perceptual rivalry. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[3]  Richard H. A. H. Jacobs,et al.  The time course of binocular rivalry reveals a fundamental role of noise. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[4]  Hugh R Wilson,et al.  Minimal physiological conditions for binocular rivalry and rivalry memory , 2007, Vision Research.

[5]  Winrich A. Freiwald,et al.  Attention to Surfaces Modulates Motion Processing in Extrastriate Area MT , 2007, Neuron.

[6]  Bart Krekelberg,et al.  Interactions between Speed and Contrast Tuning in the Middle Temporal Area: Implications for the Neural Code for Speed , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[7]  Raymond van Ee,et al.  The role of saccades in exerting voluntary control in perceptual and binocular rivalry , 2006, Vision Research.

[8]  N. Rubin,et al.  Dynamics of perceptual bi-stability : plaids and binocular rivalry compared , 2003 .

[9]  R. van Ee,et al.  Attention-biased multi-stable surface perception in three-dimensional structure-from-motion. , 2003, Journal of Vision.

[10]  R. Blake,et al.  A fresh look at the temporal dynamics of binocular rivalry , 1989, Biological Cybernetics.

[11]  M Nawrot,et al.  A neural network model of kinetic depth , 1991, Visual Neuroscience.

[12]  Allan C. Dobbins,et al.  Competition in bistable vision is attribute-specific , 2006, Vision Research.

[13]  R. Blake © 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. 5 A Primer on Binocular Rivalry, Including Current Controversies , 2000 .

[14]  F. Tong,et al.  Can attention selectively bias bistable perception? Differences between binocular rivalry and ambiguous figures. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[15]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[16]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Visual competition , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[17]  David A. Leopold,et al.  Stable perception of visually ambiguous patterns , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[18]  Stefan Treue,et al.  Structure-from-motion: Perceptual evidence for surface interpolation , 1995, Vision Research.

[19]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[20]  A. Seiffert,et al.  Motion aftereffects specific to surface depth order: beyond binocular disparity. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[21]  David A. Leopold,et al.  What is rivalling during binocular rivalry? , 1996, Nature.

[22]  G. Sperling,et al.  Luminance controls the perceived 3-D structure of dynamic 2-D displays. , 1983 .

[23]  André J. Noest,et al.  Attentional control over either of the two competing percepts of ambiguous stimuli revealed by a two-parameter analysis: Means do not make the difference , 2006, Vision Research.

[24]  T. Mueller A physiological model of binocular rivalry , 1990, Visual Neuroscience.

[25]  G. J. Brouwer,et al.  Voluntary control and the dynamics of perceptual bi-stability , 2005, Vision Research.

[26]  R. van Ee,et al.  Early interactions between neuronal adaptation and voluntary control determine perceptual choices in bistable vision. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[27]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Multistable phenomena: changing views in perception , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[28]  J. Pettigrew Searching for the Switch: Neural Bases for Perceptual Rivalry Alternations , 2001 .

[29]  J. Rinzel,et al.  Noise-induced alternations in an attractor network model of perceptual bistability. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  S. R. Lehky An Astable Multivibrator Model of Binocular Rivalry , 1988, Perception.

[31]  Raymond van Ee,et al.  Distributions of alternation rates in various forms of bistable perception. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[32]  W. Levelt The alternation process in binocular rivalry , 1966 .

[33]  R. van Ee,et al.  Percept-choice sequences driven by interrupted ambiguous stimuli: a low-level neural model. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[34]  Jonathan A. Marshall,et al.  Neural model of temporal and stochastic properties of binocular rivalry , 2000, Neurocomputing.

[35]  R. Andersen,et al.  A Computational Framework for Determining Stereo Correspondence from a Set of Linear Spatial Filters Perception of Three-dimensional Structure from Motion Review , 2022 .

[36]  Carson C. Chow,et al.  A Spiking Neuron Model for Binocular Rivalry , 2004, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[37]  Nava Rubin,et al.  The dynamics of bi-stable alternation in ambiguous motion displays: a fresh look at plaids , 2003, Vision Research.

[38]  J. Pettigrew,et al.  A Common Oscillator for Perceptual Rivalries? , 2003, Perception.

[39]  J. Driver,et al.  Subjective appearance of ambiguous structure-from-motion can be driven by objective switches of a separate less ambiguous context , 2006, Vision Research.

[40]  Hyung-Chul O. Li,et al.  Feature specific segmentation in perceived structure-from-motion , 1999, Vision Research.

[41]  Nava Rubin,et al.  Dynamical characteristics common to neuronal competition models. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[42]  C. D. Weert,et al.  A test of Levelt's second proposition for binocular rivalry , 1993, Vision Research.

[43]  Raymond van Ee,et al.  Dynamics of perceptual bi-stability for stereoscopic slant rivalry and a comparison with grating, house-face, and Necker cube rivalry , 2005, Vision Research.

[44]  R. Blake,et al.  Neural bases of binocular rivalry , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[45]  Mathias Bode,et al.  Lateral Neural Model of Binocular Rivalry , 2003, Neural Computation.