Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision

Timothy S. Meese, Mark A. Georgeson, Daniel H. Baker, David J. Holmes, Kirsten L. Challinor, Robert J. Summers

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstract

Abstract

Over the last ten years our understanding of early spatial vision has improved enormously. The long-standing model of probability summation amongst multiple independent mechanisms with static output nonlinearities responsible for masking is obsolete. It has been replaced by a much more complex network of additive, suppressive, and facilitatory interactions and nonlinearities across eyes, area, spatial frequency, and orientation that extend well beyond the classical recep-tive field (CRF). A review of a substantial body of psychophysical work performed by ourselves (20 papers), and others, leads us to the following tentative account of the processing path for signal contrast. The first suppression stage is monocular, isotropic, non-adaptable, accelerates with RMS contrast, most potent for low spatial and high temporal frequencies, and extends slightly beyond the CRF. Second and third stages of suppression are difficult to disentangle but are possibly pre- and post-binocular summation, and involve components that are scale invariant, isotropic, anisotropic, chromatic, achromatic, adaptable, interocular, substantially larger than the CRF, and saturated by contrast. The monocular excitatory pathways begin with half-wave rectification, followed by a preliminary stage of half-binocular summation, a square-law transducer, full binocular summation, pooling over phase, cross-mechanism facilitatory interactions, additive noise, linear summation over area, and a slightly uncertain decision-maker. The purpose of each of these interactions is far from clear, but the system benefits from area and binocular summation of weak contrast signals as well as area and ocularity invariances above threshold (a herd of zebras doesn't change its contrast when it increases in number or when you close one eye). One of many remaining challenges is to determine the stage or stages of spatial tuning in the excitatory pathway.
Original languageEnglish
DOIs
Publication statusUnpublished - 2009
EventApplied Vision Association Annual 2009 Meeting - Birmingham , United Kingdom
Duration: 31 Mar 2009 → …

Other

OtherApplied Vision Association Annual 2009 Meeting
CountryUnited Kingdom
CityBirmingham
Period31/03/09 → …

Fingerprint

nonlinearity
transducer
decision

Bibliographical note

Abstract published in Perception, 38(4), p. 627. ISSN: 0301-0066.

Keywords

  • early spatial vision
  • probability summation
  • multiple independent mechanisms
  • static output nonlinearities
  • masking
  • interactions
  • nonlinearities
  • eyes
  • area
  • spatial frequency
  • orientation
  • classical recep-tive field
  • CRF
  • signal contrast

Cite this

Meese, T. S., Georgeson, M. A., Baker, D. H., Holmes, D. J., Challinor, K. L., & Summers, R. J. (2009). Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision. Abstract from Applied Vision Association Annual 2009 Meeting, Birmingham , United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.1068/ava09am
Meese, Timothy S. ; Georgeson, Mark A. ; Baker, Daniel H. ; Holmes, David J. ; Challinor, Kirsten L. ; Summers, Robert J. / Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision. Abstract from Applied Vision Association Annual 2009 Meeting, Birmingham , United Kingdom.
@conference{27bbee2af36c486284d1d24cf32c9710,
title = "Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision",
abstract = "Over the last ten years our understanding of early spatial vision has improved enormously. The long-standing model of probability summation amongst multiple independent mechanisms with static output nonlinearities responsible for masking is obsolete. It has been replaced by a much more complex network of additive, suppressive, and facilitatory interactions and nonlinearities across eyes, area, spatial frequency, and orientation that extend well beyond the classical recep-tive field (CRF). A review of a substantial body of psychophysical work performed by ourselves (20 papers), and others, leads us to the following tentative account of the processing path for signal contrast. The first suppression stage is monocular, isotropic, non-adaptable, accelerates with RMS contrast, most potent for low spatial and high temporal frequencies, and extends slightly beyond the CRF. Second and third stages of suppression are difficult to disentangle but are possibly pre- and post-binocular summation, and involve components that are scale invariant, isotropic, anisotropic, chromatic, achromatic, adaptable, interocular, substantially larger than the CRF, and saturated by contrast. The monocular excitatory pathways begin with half-wave rectification, followed by a preliminary stage of half-binocular summation, a square-law transducer, full binocular summation, pooling over phase, cross-mechanism facilitatory interactions, additive noise, linear summation over area, and a slightly uncertain decision-maker. The purpose of each of these interactions is far from clear, but the system benefits from area and binocular summation of weak contrast signals as well as area and ocularity invariances above threshold (a herd of zebras doesn't change its contrast when it increases in number or when you close one eye). One of many remaining challenges is to determine the stage or stages of spatial tuning in the excitatory pathway.",
keywords = "early spatial vision, probability summation, multiple independent mechanisms, static output nonlinearities, masking, interactions, nonlinearities, eyes, area, spatial frequency, orientation, classical recep-tive field, CRF, signal contrast",
author = "Meese, {Timothy S.} and Georgeson, {Mark A.} and Baker, {Daniel H.} and Holmes, {David J.} and Challinor, {Kirsten L.} and Summers, {Robert J.}",
note = "Abstract published in Perception, 38(4), p. 627. ISSN: 0301-0066.; Applied Vision Association Annual 2009 Meeting ; Conference date: 31-03-2009",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1068/ava09am",
language = "English",

}

Meese, TS, Georgeson, MA, Baker, DH, Holmes, DJ, Challinor, KL & Summers, RJ 2009, 'Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision', Applied Vision Association Annual 2009 Meeting, Birmingham , United Kingdom, 31/03/09. https://doi.org/10.1068/ava09am

Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision. / Meese, Timothy S.; Georgeson, Mark A.; Baker, Daniel H.; Holmes, David J.; Challinor, Kirsten L.; Summers, Robert J.

2009. Abstract from Applied Vision Association Annual 2009 Meeting, Birmingham , United Kingdom.

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstract

TY - CONF

T1 - Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision

AU - Meese, Timothy S.

AU - Georgeson, Mark A.

AU - Baker, Daniel H.

AU - Holmes, David J.

AU - Challinor, Kirsten L.

AU - Summers, Robert J.

N1 - Abstract published in Perception, 38(4), p. 627. ISSN: 0301-0066.

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Over the last ten years our understanding of early spatial vision has improved enormously. The long-standing model of probability summation amongst multiple independent mechanisms with static output nonlinearities responsible for masking is obsolete. It has been replaced by a much more complex network of additive, suppressive, and facilitatory interactions and nonlinearities across eyes, area, spatial frequency, and orientation that extend well beyond the classical recep-tive field (CRF). A review of a substantial body of psychophysical work performed by ourselves (20 papers), and others, leads us to the following tentative account of the processing path for signal contrast. The first suppression stage is monocular, isotropic, non-adaptable, accelerates with RMS contrast, most potent for low spatial and high temporal frequencies, and extends slightly beyond the CRF. Second and third stages of suppression are difficult to disentangle but are possibly pre- and post-binocular summation, and involve components that are scale invariant, isotropic, anisotropic, chromatic, achromatic, adaptable, interocular, substantially larger than the CRF, and saturated by contrast. The monocular excitatory pathways begin with half-wave rectification, followed by a preliminary stage of half-binocular summation, a square-law transducer, full binocular summation, pooling over phase, cross-mechanism facilitatory interactions, additive noise, linear summation over area, and a slightly uncertain decision-maker. The purpose of each of these interactions is far from clear, but the system benefits from area and binocular summation of weak contrast signals as well as area and ocularity invariances above threshold (a herd of zebras doesn't change its contrast when it increases in number or when you close one eye). One of many remaining challenges is to determine the stage or stages of spatial tuning in the excitatory pathway.

AB - Over the last ten years our understanding of early spatial vision has improved enormously. The long-standing model of probability summation amongst multiple independent mechanisms with static output nonlinearities responsible for masking is obsolete. It has been replaced by a much more complex network of additive, suppressive, and facilitatory interactions and nonlinearities across eyes, area, spatial frequency, and orientation that extend well beyond the classical recep-tive field (CRF). A review of a substantial body of psychophysical work performed by ourselves (20 papers), and others, leads us to the following tentative account of the processing path for signal contrast. The first suppression stage is monocular, isotropic, non-adaptable, accelerates with RMS contrast, most potent for low spatial and high temporal frequencies, and extends slightly beyond the CRF. Second and third stages of suppression are difficult to disentangle but are possibly pre- and post-binocular summation, and involve components that are scale invariant, isotropic, anisotropic, chromatic, achromatic, adaptable, interocular, substantially larger than the CRF, and saturated by contrast. The monocular excitatory pathways begin with half-wave rectification, followed by a preliminary stage of half-binocular summation, a square-law transducer, full binocular summation, pooling over phase, cross-mechanism facilitatory interactions, additive noise, linear summation over area, and a slightly uncertain decision-maker. The purpose of each of these interactions is far from clear, but the system benefits from area and binocular summation of weak contrast signals as well as area and ocularity invariances above threshold (a herd of zebras doesn't change its contrast when it increases in number or when you close one eye). One of many remaining challenges is to determine the stage or stages of spatial tuning in the excitatory pathway.

KW - early spatial vision

KW - probability summation

KW - multiple independent mechanisms

KW - static output nonlinearities

KW - masking

KW - interactions

KW - nonlinearities

KW - eyes

KW - area

KW - spatial frequency

KW - orientation

KW - classical recep-tive field

KW - CRF

KW - signal contrast

U2 - 10.1068/ava09am

DO - 10.1068/ava09am

M3 - Abstract

ER -

Meese TS, Georgeson MA, Baker DH, Holmes DJ, Challinor KL, Summers RJ. Suppression and summation in contrast gain control for human vision. 2009. Abstract from Applied Vision Association Annual 2009 Meeting, Birmingham , United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.1068/ava09am