MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3096993376 · doi:10.1167/jov.20.11.856

Enhancement of luminance sensitivity by chromatic pedestals - a model of nonlinear parvocellular luminance processing

2020· article· en· W3096993376 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Shooner, Kathy T. Mullen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLuminanceParvocellular cellChromatic scaleOpticsChromaticityPsychophysicsPhysicsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer sciencePerceptionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perceptual interactions between red-green (RG) color and luminance contrast offer insight into how these attributes are jointly encoded by parvocellular neurons of the LGN and their cortical targets. Here we show that the enhancement of luminance sensitivity by RG chromatic pedestals can be accounted for by a model in which luminance is computed cortically from the rectified outputs of parvocellular-like units. We used uniform luminance patch stimuli (4 deg diameter, 300 ms duration) presented foveally, superimposed on RG, luminance and a range of combined color-luminance pedestals of varying intensities. In a 2-interval task, subjects (n=3) identified which stimulus had the luminance increment. We also tested RG pedestals peripherally (8 deg horizontally) using an equivalent spatial 2AFC task. Every pedestal tested reduced luminance thresholds at some intensity. The form of facilitation varied with pedestal chromaticity, with chromatic pedestals having an effect at lower pedestal contrasts. Our model predicts this chromatic tuning from the cone-opponency of parvocellular-like units. The outputs of L- and M-cone center units are rectified then summed in a luminance mechanism with an expansive output nonlinearity. Rectification prevents cancellation of L-M opponent signals, allowing RG pedestals to interact with luminance signals at the later nonlinear stage. Notably, the effects pedestals had on luminance sensitivity were not predictable from their visibility. Foveally, chromatic pedestals were visible at contrasts much lower than those that influenced luminance, unlike luminance pedestals, which had an effect near their detection threshold. In the periphery, RG pedestal detection thresholds increased by a factor of 4 or more, but the site of facilitation changed less, such that RG pedestals had an effect near their detection threshold. This dissociation suggests that the mechanisms mediating pedestal facilitation, though chromatically tuned, are distinct from those limiting chromatic detection.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vision→Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanisms→French-language works237,207→