The spatial properties of opponent-motion normalization

Modelling adaptation to directional motion using the Adelson-Bergen energy sensor

The motion energy sensor has been shown to account for a wide range of physiological and psychophysical results in motion detection and discrimination studies. It has become established as the standard computational model for retinal movement sensing in the human visual system. Adaptation effects have been extensively studied in the psychophysical literature on motion perception, and play a crucial role in theoretical debates, but the current implementation of the energy sensor does not provide directly for modelling adaptation-induced changes in output. We describe an extension of the model to incorporate changes in output due to adaptation. The extended model first computes a space-time representation of the output to a given stimulus, and then a RC gain-control circuit ("leaky integrator") is applied to the time-dependent output. The output of the extended model shows effects which mirror those observed in psychophysical studies of motion adaptation: a decline in sensor output during stimulation, and changes in the relative of outputs of different sensors following this adaptation.

Contextual effects in speed perception may occur at an early stage of processing

How does nearby motion affect the perceived speed of a target region? When a central drifting Gabor patch is surrounded by translating noise, its speed can be misperceived over a fourfold range. Typically, when a surround moves in the same direction, perceived centre speed is reduced; for opposite-direction surrounds it increases. Measuring this illusion for a variety of surround properties reveals that the motion context effects are a saturating function of surround speed (Experiment I) and contrast (Experiment II). Our analyses indicate that the effects are consistent with a subtractive process, rather than with speed being averaged over area. In Experiment III we exploit known properties of the motion system to ask where these surround effects impact. Using 2D plaid stimuli, we find that surround-induced shifts in perceived speed of one plaid component produce substantial shifts in perceived plaid direction. This indicates that surrounds exert their influence early in processing, before pattern motion direction is computed. These findings relate to ongoing investigations of surround suppression for direction discrimination, and are consistent with single-cell findings of direction-tuned suppressive and facilitatory interactions in primary visual cortex (V1).

Motion transparency from opposing luminance modulated and contrast modulated gratings

Two luminance gratings of identical orientation and opposite directions of motion are seen as moving across one another (i.e. moving transparently) only if they differ in spatial frequency (SF) by a factor of four or more. Identical SF gratings produce counter-phase flicker. This suggests that opposite motions cancel each other at the level of motion detection. Here we show that motion transparency is perceived with two gratings of the same SF and orientation moving in opposite directions, when one grating is a first-order, luminance modulated (LM) stimulus and the other is a second-order, contrast modulated (CM) stimulus. Participants were presented with various combinations of LM and CM gratings. In experiment 1, the test stimulus contained the summation of oppositely moving LM and CM gratings. In order to assess the simultaneous perception of both motions, we used a paradigm where observers were required to discriminate the direction of motion of each component from counter-phase flicker. Results show that observers can accurately discriminate both LM and CM directions of motion in a transparent configuration. We next measured the effect of varying the contrast/modulation depth of LM and CM gratings on the perception of transparency. The perception of motion transparency depends upon the relative contrast/modulation depth of the component gratings: raising the contrast of the LM component necessitates a greater modulation depth for the CM component if motion transparency is to be perceived. Our results are consistent with a motion system comprised of two separate, but not wholly independent, pathways for the encoding of LM and CM signals. We hypothesise that the observed contrast dependence is the result of contrast gain control mechanisms that receive inputs from separate motion systems.

Binocular contrast interactions in two-frame motion discrimination

Previous studies have shown that two-frame motion detection thresholds are elevated if one frame's contrast is raised, despite the increase in average contrast--the "contrast paradox". In this study, we investigated if such contrast interactions occurred at a monocular or binocular site of visual processing. Two-frame motion direction discrimination thresholds were measured for motion frames that were presented binocularly, dichoptically or interocularly. Thresholds for each presentation condition were measured for motion frames that comprised either matched or unmatched contrasts. The results showed that contrast mechanisms producing the contrast paradox combine contrast signals from both eyes prior to motion computation. Furthermore, the results are consistent with the existence of monocular and binocular contrast gain control mechanisms that coexist either as combined or independent systems.

Global shape coding for motion-defined radial-frequency contours

The visual system is highly skilled at recovering the shape of complex objects defined exclusively by motion cues. But while low-level and high-level mechanisms involved in shape-from-motion have been studied extensively, intermediate computational stages remain poorly understood. In the present study, we used motion-defined radial-frequency contours--or motion RFs--to probe intermediate stages involved in the computation of motion-defined shape. Motion RFs consisted of a virtual circle of Gabor elements whose carriers drifted at speeds determined by a sinusoidal function of polar angle. Motion RFs elicited vivid percepts of shape, and observers could detect and discriminate radial frequencies up to approximately five cycles. Randomizing Gabor speeds over a small contour segment impaired detection and discrimination performance significantly more than predicted by probability summation. Threshold comparisons between spatial-RF and motion-RF contours ruled out that motion-induced shifts in perceived position (i.e., the DeValois effect) determine shape perception in motion RFs. Together, results indicate that the shape of motion RFs is processed by synergistic mechanisms that perform a global analysis of motion cues over space. These results are integrated with data on perceptual interactions between motion RFs and spatial-RFs and are discussed in terms of cue-specific and cue-invariant representations of object shape in human vision.

Opponent-motion mechanisms are self-normalizing

In the ultimate stage of the Adelson-Bergen motion energy model [Adelson, E. H., & Bergen, J. (1985). Spatiotemporal energy models for the perception of motion. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 2, 284-299], motion is derived from the difference between directionally opponent energies E(L) and E(R). However, Georgeson and Scott-Samuel [Georgeson, M. A., & Scott-Samuel, N. E. (1999). Motion contrast: A new metric for direction discrimination. Vision Research, 39, 4393-4402] demonstrated that motion contrast-a metric that normalizes opponent motion energy (E(L)-E(R)) by flicker energy (E(L)+E(R))-is a better descriptor of human direction discrimination. In a previous study [Rainville, S. J. M., Makous, W. L., & Scott-Samuel, N. E. (2002). The spatial properties of opponent-motion normalization. Vision Research, 42, 1727-1738], we used a lateral masking paradigm to show that opponent-motion normalization is selective for flicker position, orientation, and spatial-frequency. In the present study, we used a superposition masking paradigm and compared results to lateral masking data, as the two masking types activate local and remote normalization mechanisms differentially. Although selectivity for flicker orientation and spatial frequency varied across observers, bandwidths were similar across lateral and superimposed masking conditions. Additional experiments demonstrated that normalization signals are pooled over a spatial region whose aspect ratio and size are consistent with those of local motion detectors. Together, results show no evidence of remote normalization signals predicted by broadband inhibitory models [(e.g.) Heeger, D. J. (1992). Normalization of cell responses in cat striate cortex. Visual Neuroscience, 9, 181-197; Foley, J. M. (1994). Human luminance pattern-vision mechanisms: Masking experiments require a new model. Journal of the Optical Society of America A-Optics and Image Science, 11, 1710-1719] but support a local normalization process whose spatial properties are inherited from low-level motion detectors.

Differential binocular input and local stereopsis

Using fractal noise images, we measured the dependence of Dmin and Dmax for stereo on the interocular differences of spatial frequency and contrast. Dmin exhibits a strong dependence on the highest spatial frequency contained in the image, while Dmax exhibits a weaker dependence on the lowest spatial frequency contained within the image. Neither relationship was found to be different when the filtering was restricted to only one eye's image, although the effect of differential lowpass filtering for Dmin was greater than that of binocular lowpass filtering. Contrast is thought to affect stereo performance particularly when it is reduced in only one eye's image. We show that, at least for broadband fractal images representative of everyday natural images, interocular contrast differences are no more disruptive than binocular ones. These results bear upon the nature of the matching process in stereopsis. The fact that these interocular spatial frequency and contrast manipulations do not selectively degrade stereopsis beyond that expected from a consideration of purely monocular effects is consistent with matching occurring within multiple spatial channels prior to their combination.