Ocular drift shakes the stationary view on pattern vision.

IF 2.3 4区 心理学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Lynn Schmittwilken, Marianne Maertens
{"title":"Ocular drift shakes the stationary view on pattern vision.","authors":"Lynn Schmittwilken, Marianne Maertens","doi":"10.1167/jov.25.8.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The mechanisms by which the visual system extracts key features (i.e., edges) from the visual input remain not fully understood. As reflected in the term spatial vision, pattern vision is traditionally assumed to operate on stationary visual inputs. However, our eyes are never truly still. Involuntary eye movements, specifically ocular drift, continuously alter the visual input during fixations and redistribute its power, emphasizing high spatial frequency contents. In this study, we examine the role of ocular drift on edge sensitivity in noise. We show that drift-induced shifts in stimulus power lead to better predictions of the empirical data, consistent with the human contrast sensitivity function. We then incorporate drift into a mechanistic model of spatial vision to test whether this further improves model predictions. Surprisingly, the original spatial model outperforms the drift-enhanced version. It does so in an interesting way: It artificially compensates for the absence of drift by redistributing the activity across its spatial frequency channels in later processing stages, effectively mimicking the effect of a dynamic input without explicitly modeling it. By contrast, a simpler model with a single spatial frequency channel benefits from drift but performs poorly when drift is removed. These findings suggest that standard model architectures inherently favor a stationary view of visual processing, which could result in self-confirming theories. Incorporating the dynamic nature of the visual input may offer a more accurate model of how the brain processes key features of natural scenes. However, doing so requires a critical reassessment of long-standing frameworks in visual neuroscience.</p>","PeriodicalId":49955,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vision","volume":"25 8","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12306695/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vision","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.25.8.17","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The mechanisms by which the visual system extracts key features (i.e., edges) from the visual input remain not fully understood. As reflected in the term spatial vision, pattern vision is traditionally assumed to operate on stationary visual inputs. However, our eyes are never truly still. Involuntary eye movements, specifically ocular drift, continuously alter the visual input during fixations and redistribute its power, emphasizing high spatial frequency contents. In this study, we examine the role of ocular drift on edge sensitivity in noise. We show that drift-induced shifts in stimulus power lead to better predictions of the empirical data, consistent with the human contrast sensitivity function. We then incorporate drift into a mechanistic model of spatial vision to test whether this further improves model predictions. Surprisingly, the original spatial model outperforms the drift-enhanced version. It does so in an interesting way: It artificially compensates for the absence of drift by redistributing the activity across its spatial frequency channels in later processing stages, effectively mimicking the effect of a dynamic input without explicitly modeling it. By contrast, a simpler model with a single spatial frequency channel benefits from drift but performs poorly when drift is removed. These findings suggest that standard model architectures inherently favor a stationary view of visual processing, which could result in self-confirming theories. Incorporating the dynamic nature of the visual input may offer a more accurate model of how the brain processes key features of natural scenes. However, doing so requires a critical reassessment of long-standing frameworks in visual neuroscience.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

眼球漂移动摇了模式视觉上的静止观。
视觉系统从视觉输入中提取关键特征(即边缘)的机制尚不完全清楚。正如空间视觉所反映的那样,模式视觉传统上被认为是在固定的视觉输入上运行的。然而,我们的眼睛永远不会真正静止。眼球运动,特别是眼球漂移,在注视过程中不断改变视觉输入并重新分配其能量,强调高空间频率的内容。在本研究中,我们研究了眼漂移对噪声边缘敏感性的作用。我们表明,漂移引起的刺激功率的变化导致更好的预测经验数据,与人类对比敏感度函数一致。然后,我们将漂移纳入空间视觉的机制模型,以测试这是否进一步提高了模型预测。令人惊讶的是,原来的空间模型优于漂移增强版本。它以一种有趣的方式做到了这一点:在后期处理阶段,它通过在其空间频率通道中重新分配活动来人为地补偿漂移的缺失,有效地模仿动态输入的效果,而无需明确建模。相比之下,具有单一空间频率通道的简单模型从漂移中受益,但在去除漂移时性能较差。这些发现表明,标准模型架构本质上倾向于视觉处理的静止观点,这可能导致自我确认理论。结合视觉输入的动态特性可以提供一个更准确的模型,说明大脑如何处理自然场景的关键特征。然而,这样做需要对视觉神经科学中长期存在的框架进行批判性的重新评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Vision
Journal of Vision 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
218
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Exploring all aspects of biological visual function, including spatial vision, perception, low vision, color vision and more, spanning the fields of neuroscience, psychology and psychophysics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信