Correspondence-based and energy-based detection of second-order motion in human vision.

Motion in the retinal image may occur either in the form of spatiotemporal variations in luminance (first-order motion) or as spatiotemporal variations in characteristics derived from luminance, such as contrast (second-order motion). Second-order motion patterns were employed in an attempt to establish the principles used for the detection of image motion in the human visual system. In principle, one can detect motion at a high level of visual analysis by identifying features of the image and tracking their positions (correspondence-based detection) or at a low level by analysis of spatiotemporal luminance variations without reference to features (intensity-based detection). Prevailing models favor the latter approach, which has been adapted to account for the visibility of second-order motion by postulation of a stage of rectification that precedes motion energy detection [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 5, 1986 (1988)]. In two experiments it is shown that second-order motion is indeed detected normally by use of the strategy of transformation plus energy detection but that detection can also be achieved by use of the feature-correspondence strategy when the intensity strategy fails. In the first experiment, a stimulus is employed in which opposite directions of motion perception are predicted by the two strategies. It is shown that normally the direction associated with motion energy in the rectified image is seen but that the direction associated with feature motion is seen when the energy system is disabled by the use of an interstimulus interval.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[1]  A. T. Smith,et al.  Direction identification thresholds for second-order motion in central and peripheral vision. , 1994, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[2]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Motion: the long and short of it. , 1989, Spatial vision.

[3]  E H Adelson,et al.  Spatiotemporal energy models for the perception of motion. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[4]  K. Turano Evidence for a Common Motion Mechanism of Luminance-Modulated and Contrast-Modulated Patterns: Selective Adaptation , 1991, Perception.

[5]  P. McOwan,et al.  A computational model of the analysis of some first-order and second-order motion patterns by simple and complex cells , 1992, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[6]  Mark A. Georgeson,et al.  Monocular motion sensing, binocular motion perception , 1989, Vision Research.

[7]  Andrew T. Smith,et al.  Evidence for separate motion-detecting mechanisms for first- and second-order motion in human vision , 1994, Vision Research.

[8]  O J Braddick,et al.  Low-level and high-level processes in apparent motion. , 1980, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[9]  C L Baker,et al.  A processing stream in mammalian visual cortex neurons for non-Fourier responses. , 1993, Science.

[10]  A. T. Smith,et al.  Transparent motion from feature- and luminance-based processes , 1993, Vision Research.

[11]  D. Burr,et al.  Spatial and temporal selectivity of the human motion detection system , 1985, Vision Research.

[12]  O. Braddick A short-range process in apparent motion. , 1974, Vision research.

[13]  P Cavanagh,et al.  Short-range vs long-range motion: not a valid distinction. , 1991, Spatial vision.

[14]  S. Anstis The perception of apparent movement. , 1980, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[15]  D W Heeley,et al.  Anisotropic Axes in Orientation Perception are Not Retinotopically Mapped , 1993, Perception.

[16]  D. Broadbent,et al.  Some experiments bearing on the hypothesis that the visual system analyses spatial patterns in independent bands of spatial frequency , 1975, Vision Research.

[17]  Mark A. Georgeson,et al.  The temporal range of motion sensing and motion perception , 1990, Vision Research.

[18]  G. Sperling,et al.  Drift-balanced random stimuli: a general basis for studying non-Fourier motion perception. , 1988, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[19]  T D Albright,et al.  Form-cue invariant motion processing in primate visual cortex. , 1992, Science.

[20]  H. Wilson,et al.  A psychophysically motivated model for two-dimensional motion perception , 1992, Visual Neuroscience.

[21]  W. Weibull A Statistical Distribution Function of Wide Applicability , 1951 .

[22]  A. T. Smith,et al.  Motion defined exclusively by second-order characteristics does not evoke optokinetic nystagmus , 1992, Visual Neuroscience.

[23]  P Cavanagh,et al.  Attention-based motion perception. , 1992, Science.

[24]  G. Mather,et al.  Evidence for second-order motion detectors , 1993, Vision Research.

[25]  A. Derrington,et al.  Separate detectors for simple and complex grating patterns? , 1985, Vision Research.