Does spatial invariance result from insensitivity to change?

One of the fundamental unanswered questions in visual science regards how the visual system attains a high degree of invariance (e.g., position invariance, size invariance, etc.) while maintaining high selectivity. Although a variety of theories have been proposed, most are distinguished by the degree to which information is maintained or discarded. To test whether information is maintained or discarded, we have compared the ability of the human visual system to detect a variety of wide-field changes to natural images. The changes range from simple affine transforms and intensity changes common to our visual experience to random changes as represented by the addition of white noise. When sensitivity was measured in terms of the Euclidean distance (L(2) norm) between image pairs, we found that observers were an order of magnitude less sensitive to the geometric transformations than to added noise. A control experiment ruled out that the sensitivity difference was caused by the statistical properties of the image difference created by this transformation. We argue that the remarkable difference in sensitivity relates to the processes used by the visual system to build invariant relationships and leads to the unusual result that observers are least sensitive to those transformations most commonly experienced in the natural world.

[1]  R. Shepard,et al.  Mental Rotation of Three-Dimensional Objects , 1971, Science.

[2]  P. O. Bishop,et al.  Spatial vision. , 1971, Annual review of psychology.

[3]  H B Barlow,et al.  Single units and sensation: a neuron doctrine for perceptual psychology? , 1972, Perception.

[4]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Psychophysical isolation of movement sensitivity by removal of familiar position cues , 1981, Vision Research.

[5]  G. Buchsbaum,et al.  Trichromacy, opponent colours coding and optimum colour information transmission in the retina , 1983, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[6]  Curtis L. Baker,et al.  Eccentricity-dependent scaling of the limits for short-range apparent motion perception , 1985, Vision Research.

[7]  Charles R. Johnson,et al.  Norms for vectors and matrices , 1985 .

[8]  J E Cutting,et al.  Rigidity in cinema seen from the front row, side aisle. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  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.

[10]  James E. Cutting,et al.  Rigidity in Cinema Seen From the Front Row, Side Aisle , 1987 .

[11]  A. Gilchrist,et al.  The ratio principle holds over a million-to-one range of illumination , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  Kunihiko Fukushima,et al.  Neocognitron: A hierarchical neural network capable of visual pattern recognition , 1988, Neural Networks.

[13]  J E Cutting,et al.  Masking the motions of human gait , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  M. Tarr,et al.  Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition , 1989, Cognitive Psychology.

[15]  John E. Howland,et al.  Computer graphics , 1990, IEEE Potentials.

[16]  T A Busey,et al.  Compensation is unnecessary for the perception of faces in slanted pictures , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  A. Gilchrist,et al.  Relative luminance is not derived from absolute luminance , 1991 .

[18]  R. Desimone Face-Selective Cells in the Temporal Cortex of Monkeys , 1991, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  D. V. van Essen,et al.  A neurobiological model of visual attention and invariant pattern recognition based on dynamic routing of information , 1993, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[20]  Patrick C. Teo,et al.  Perceptual image distortion , 1994, Electronic Imaging.

[21]  David J. Field,et al.  What Is the Goal of Sensory Coding? , 1994, Neural Computation.

[22]  D. Field,et al.  What's constant in contrast constancy? The effects of scaling on the perceived contrast of bandpass patterns , 1995, Vision Research.

[23]  Minami Ito,et al.  Size and position invariance of neuronal responses in monkey inferotemporal cortex. , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[24]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys , 1995, Current Biology.

[25]  E. Rolls,et al.  INVARIANT FACE AND OBJECT RECOGNITION IN THE VISUAL SYSTEM , 1997, Progress in Neurobiology.

[26]  D. Ruderman,et al.  Statistics of cone responses to natural images: implications for visual coding , 1998 .

[27]  Mitchell G. A. Thomson,et al.  Higher-order structure in natural scenes , 1999 .

[28]  H Barlow,et al.  Redundancy reduction revisited , 2001, Network.

[29]  Qasim Zaidi,et al.  Color constancy in a rough world , 2001 .

[30]  Donald I. A. MacLeod,et al.  Influence of scene statistics on colour constancy , 2002, Nature.

[31]  Laurence T Maloney,et al.  Illuminant estimation as cue combination. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[32]  D. Brainard,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article LIGHTNESS CONSTANCY: A Direct Test of the Illumination-Estimation Hypothesis , 2022 .

[33]  D. Chandler,et al.  Effects of natural images on the detectability of simple and compound wavelet subband quantization distortions. , 2003, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[34]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Image Quality Assessment: From Error Measurement to Structural Similarity , 2004 .

[35]  Bruno A Olshausen,et al.  Sparse coding of sensory inputs , 2004, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[36]  Laurenz Wiskott,et al.  How Does Our Visual System Achieve Shift and Size Invariance , 2004 .

[37]  Reinhard Wolf,et al.  Visual Pattern Recognition in Drosophila Is Invariant for Retinal Position , 2004, Science.

[38]  Tamara Munzner,et al.  Perceptual invariance of nonlinear Focus+Context transformations , 2004, APGV '04.

[39]  David J. Field,et al.  An attempt towards a unified account of non-linearities in visual neurons , 2004 .

[40]  C. Baker,et al.  First- and second-order information in natural images: a filter-based approach to image statistics. , 2004, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[41]  Ronald A. Rensink The Invariance of Visual Search to Geometric Transformation , 2004 .

[42]  Yong Huang,et al.  Texture decomposition by harmonics extraction from higher order statistics , 2004, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[43]  L. Chalupa,et al.  The visual neurosciences , 2004 .

[44]  H E Smithson,et al.  Sensory, computational and cognitive components of human colour constancy , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[45]  Michael S. Ambinder,et al.  Change blindness , 1997, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[46]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Translation insensitive image similarity in complex wavelet domain , 2005, Proceedings. (ICASSP '05). IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2005..

[47]  T. Sejnowski,et al.  23 problems in systems neuroscience , 2006 .

[48]  Yohtaro Takano,et al.  Mental Rotation , 2008 .

[49]  H. Barlow,et al.  Single Units and Sensation: A Neuron Doctrine for Perceptual Psychology? , 1972, Perception.