Speed adaptation as Kalman filtering

If the purpose of adaptation is to fit sensory systems to different environments, it may implement an optimization of the system. What the optimum is depends on the statistics of these environments. Therefore, the system should update its parameters as the environment changes. A Kalman-filtering strategy performs such an update optimally by combining current estimations of the environment with those from the past. We investigate whether the visual system uses such a strategy for speed adaptation. We performed a matching-speed experiment to evaluate the time course of adaptation to an abrupt velocity change. Experimental results are in agreement with Kalman-modeling predictions for speed adaptation. When subjects adapt to a low speed and it suddenly increases, the time course of adaptation presents two phases, namely, a rapid decrease of perceived speed followed by a slower phase. In contrast, when speed changes from fast to slow, adaptation presents a single phase. In the Kalman-model simulations, this asymmetry is due to the prevalence of low speeds in natural images. However, this asymmetry disappears both experimentally and in simulations when the adapting stimulus is noisy. In both transitions, adaptation now occurs in a single phase. Finally, the model also predicts the change in sensitivity to speed discrimination produced by the adaptation.

[1]  Kenneth O. Johnson,et al.  Review: Neural Coding and the Basic Law of Psychophysics , 2002, The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry.

[2]  S. Laughlin The role of sensory adaptation in the retina. , 1989, The Journal of experimental biology.

[3]  P. Thompson Perceived rate of movement depends on contrast , 1982, Vision Research.

[4]  Christopher W Tyler,et al.  Separating the effects of response nonlinearity and internal noise psychophysically , 2002, Vision Research.

[5]  Robert J. Snowden,et al.  Perceived contrast as a function of adaptation duration , 1994, Vision Research.

[6]  C. Clifford,et al.  Psychophysics of motion adaptation parallels insect electrophysiology , 1996, Current Biology.

[7]  D. Sagi,et al.  Inverse modeling of human contrast response , 2007, Vision Research.

[8]  Norberto M. Grzywacz,et al.  Distribution of velocities in movies from natural human settings , 2010 .

[9]  D. Regan,et al.  Postadaptation orientation discrimination. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[10]  M A Georgeson,et al.  The effect of spatial adaptation on perceived contrast. , 1985, Spatial vision.

[11]  Norberto M. Grzywacz,et al.  The Minimal Local-Asperity Hypothesis of Early Retinal Lateral Inhibition , 2000, Neural Computation.

[12]  E. Adelson,et al.  Slow and Smooth: A Bayesian theory for the combination of local motion signals in human vision , 1998 .

[13]  J. Thorson,et al.  Distributed Relaxation Processes in Sensory Adaptation , 1974, Science.

[14]  D. Sagi,et al.  Singularities explained: Response to Klein , 2007, Vision Research.

[15]  N. Grzywacz,et al.  Sensory adaptation as Kalman filtering: theory and illustration with contrast adaptation , 2003, Network.

[16]  N. Grzywacz,et al.  Power spectra and distribution of contrasts of natural images from different habitats , 2003, Vision Research.

[17]  C. Blakemore,et al.  Stimulus specificity in the human visual system. , 1973, Vision research.

[18]  Stanley A Klein A local measure for modeling contrast discrimination: Response to Katkov, Tsodyks and Sagi , 2007, Vision Research.

[19]  S. Klein,et al.  Separating transducer non-linearities and multiplicative noise in contrast discrimination , 2006, Vision Research.

[20]  Norberto M. Grzywacz,et al.  A Bayesian Framework for Sensory Adaptation , 2002, Neural Computation.

[21]  Jose F. Barraza,et al.  Speed adaptation as Kalman filtering , 2010 .

[22]  Joseph J. Atick,et al.  What Does the Retina Know about Natural Scenes? , 1992, Neural Computation.

[23]  A. T. Smith,et al.  Antagonistic comparison of temporal frequency filter outputs as a basis for speed perception , 1994, Vision Research.

[24]  M. Carandini,et al.  A tonic hyperpolarization underlying contrast adaptation in cat visual cortex. , 1997, Science.

[25]  Stephen T. Hammett,et al.  The dynamics of velocity adaptation in human vision , 2000, Current Biology.

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

[27]  N M Grzywacz,et al.  The role of early retinal lateral inhibition: More than maximizing luminance information , 2000, Visual Neuroscience.

[28]  C. Clifford Perceptual adaptation: motion parallels orientation , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[29]  J. Atick,et al.  STATISTICS OF NATURAL TIME-VARYING IMAGES , 1995 .

[30]  F. Heitger,et al.  The functional role of contrast adaptation , 1988, Vision Research.

[31]  Peter J. Bex,et al.  Apparent speed and speed sensitivity during adaptation to motion , 1999 .

[32]  P. Thompson,et al.  Human speed perception is contrast dependent , 1992, Vision Research.

[33]  Peter Wenderoth,et al.  Adaptation to temporal modulation can enhance differential speed sensitivity , 1999, Vision Research.

[34]  S. Laughlin,et al.  Predictive coding: a fresh view of inhibition in the retina , 1982, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[35]  Mark A. Georgeson,et al.  Fixed or variable noise in contrast discrimination? The jury’s still out… , 2006, Vision Research.

[36]  Mikhail Katkov,et al.  Singularities in the inverse modeling of 2AFC contrast discrimination data , 2006, Vision Research.

[37]  S. Ullman,et al.  Rigidity and Smoothness of Motion , 1987 .