Visual Perception: A Novel Difference Channel in Binocular Vision

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Volume 54, Issue 6, Pages (June 2007)
Advertisements

Calibrating color vision
Volume 24, Issue 23, Pages R1109-R1111 (December 2014)
Fan worm eyes Current Biology
Animal Vision: Rats Watch the Sky
Volume 19, Issue 22, Pages R1022-R1023 (December 2009)
Parahippocampal Cortex: Translating Vision into Space
A push-pull treatment for strengthening the ‘lazy eye’ in amblyopia
Efficient Receptive Field Tiling in Primate V1
Sensory-Motor Integration: More Variability Reduces Individuality
Visual Categorization: When Categories Fall to Pieces
Visual Development: Learning Not to See
Human Neurophysiology: Sampling the Perceptual World
Autism: Face-Processing Clues to Inheritance
Linguistic Relativity: Does Language Help or Hinder Perception?
Honeybee Vision: In Good Shape for Shape Recognition
Volume 21, Issue 20, Pages R837-R838 (October 2011)
Marr's vision: Twenty-five years on
Vision: In the Brain of the Beholder
Insect Neurobiology: An Eye to Forward Motion
Morphogens: Precise Outputs from a Variable Gradient
Visual Attention: Bottom-Up Versus Top-Down
Volume 24, Issue 5, Pages R204-R206 (March 2014)
Volume 22, Issue 17, Pages R668-R669 (September 2012)
Antarctic sea ice losses drive gains in benthic carbon drawdown
RecA Current Biology Volume 17, Issue 11, Pages R395-R397 (June 2007)
Visual Attention: Size Matters
Face Pareidolia in the Rhesus Monkey
A Novel Form of Stereo Vision in the Praying Mantis
Volume 25, Issue 13, Pages R547-R548 (June 2015)
A Novel Form of Stereo Vision in the Praying Mantis
Volume 18, Issue 11, Pages R453-R455 (June 2008)
Honeybee Communication: A Signal for Danger
Vision: When Does Looking Bigger Mean Seeing Better?
Volume 23, Issue 7, Pages R265-R266 (April 2013)
The many colours of ‘the dress’
Nicolas Catz, Peter W. Dicke, Peter Thier  Current Biology 
Marr's vision: Twenty-five years on
Rosa Lafer-Sousa, Katherine L. Hermann, Bevil R. Conway 
Peter Janssen, Rufin Vogels, Yan Liu, Guy A Orban  Neuron 
Volume 24, Issue 7, Pages R262-R263 (March 2014)
Flies see second-order motion
Non-cortical magnitude coding of space and time by pigeons
Visual Sensitivity Can Scale with Illusory Size Changes
Volume 15, Issue 13, Pages R483-R484 (July 2005)
Volume 23, Issue 21, Pages R963-R965 (November 2013)
Visual Development: Learning Not to See
Neuroimaging: Perception at the Brain's Core
Centrosome Size: Scaling Without Measuring
N. Barnsley, J.H. McAuley, R. Mohan, A. Dey, P. Thomas, G.L. Moseley 
Volume 7, Issue 6, Pages R147-R151 (June 2000)
Keith A. May, Li Zhaoping, Paul B. Hibbard  Current Biology 
Neuroanatomy: Connectome Connects Fly and Mammalian Brain Networks
Binocular Vision: The Eyes Add and Subtract
Claudia Lunghi, Uzay E. Emir, Maria Concetta Morrone, Holly Bridge 
Multisensory Integration: Space, Time and Superadditivity
The Perception and Misperception of Specular Surface Reflectance
Visual Circuits: Division of Labor Revealed
Experience-Driven Plasticity in Binocular Vision
Insect Vision: Judging Distance with Binocular Motion Disparities
Visual Perception: One World from Two Eyes
Basal bodies Current Biology
Volume 58, Issue 4, Pages (May 2008)
Nonvisual Motor Training Influences Biological Motion Perception
Vision: Attending the Invisible
Matthew W. Hahn, Gregory C. Lanzaro  Current Biology 
Circadian Biology: The Early Bird Catches the Morning Shift
Efficient Receptive Field Tiling in Primate V1
Volume 18, Issue 5, Pages R198-R202 (March 2008)
Head-Eye Coordination at a Microscopic Scale
Presentation transcript:

Visual Perception: A Novel Difference Channel in Binocular Vision Sid Henriksen, Jenny C.A. Read  Current Biology  Volume 26, Issue 12, Pages R500-R503 (June 2016) DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2016.04.049 Copyright © 2016 Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Horizontal test image from May and Zhaoping [5]. The top panel shows the monocular images presented to the left and right eyes. The bottom panel shows the binocular images obtained by either summing or subtracting the two images (denoted by L + R and L – R, respectively). Current Biology 2016 26, R500-R503DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2016.04.049) Copyright © 2016 Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Stereopairs and pixel-by-pixel relationships. Top row shows two images seen by the left (L) and right (R) eyes, and a scatterplot showing the contrast of each pixel in the right image (R) plotted against the luminance of the pixel at the same position in the left image. The left and right images are highly correlated, so a more efficient representation can be achieved if we rotate the axis so that the L and R values are expressed in terms of the sum and difference (S = R + L and D = R – L, respectively). The bottom row shows the summed and differenced images, and the pixel-by-pixel relationship between S and D, following a scaling g applied to D such that S and D have the same variance. Due to the axis rotation in the top panel, S and D are now uncorrelated. Importantly, it is the scaling which achieves the efficiency gain. An axis rotation alone would not achieve this. Stereopair is ‘piano’ from the 2014 Middlebury dataset [14]. Current Biology 2016 26, R500-R503DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2016.04.049) Copyright © 2016 Terms and Conditions