Abstract
There is a rich literature of physiological studies that a subset of neurons in visual cortices is discriminative of 3-D surface orientation using only the disparity gradient information. One of the physiological models to account for this sensibility to surface slant is the dif-frequency disparity model. Although this model is physiologically plausible, no computational analysis is available to explain how first-order-disparity sensitive neurons detect slanted surface. In this paper a computational model based on the dif-frequency disparity model is presented. In particular, analytical expressions that fit well with neuronal responses to broadband stimuli are obtained when simple cell receptive field is described by log-Gabor filters. It is shown with mathematical analysis and numerical simulations that our proposed model can not only account for physiological data of neuronal response to surface slant but also detect disparity gradient from random dot and sinusoidal grating stereograms.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8139f/8139f4d5f0cc11a0095ffcee266b7b087ba280f6" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6e6eb/6e6eb153910ad1ebea6f61ed9eadd84a55d69dad" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0831e/0831e7f198b5a17617ca5323c442ada916867bad" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6d3bd/6d3bdee647b2e88fc088a87881b3e6764851e024" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4bdc2/4bdc22909daa060ecc0f8221fd7a845e9810ff15" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3e602/3e60277c7d7e985ceceedb4d4e19a2a140cb77d3" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/40d64/40d64c4fa9a9e8691d098054df1cb52e8bc0a9eb" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6ec3b/6ec3bf2867b757a44d88bbddad0cfeae8728f06d" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8cc5e/8cc5e8b04e38a2dd58d90fbc362ecfbcd32244c6" alt=""
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Notes
In this paper, the disparity gradient refers to the first-order derivative of disparity within the receptive field, not the definition proposed by Burt and Julesz (1980).
The preferred disparity gradient of the cell is the peak position of the disparity gradient tuning curve.
Strictly speaking, the relation is not exactly linear and depends on the separation of the eyes and distance from the subject to the fixation point. Here we use a linear approximation to describe this relation.
References
Blakemore C (1970) A new kind of stereoscopic vision. Vis Res 10:1181–1199
Burt P, Julesz B (1980) Modifications of the classical notion of Panum’s fusional area. Perception 9(6):671–682
Chen Y, Qian N (2004) A coarse-to-fine disparity energy model with both phase-shift and position-shift receptive field mechanisms. Neural Comput 16:1545–1577
Daugman J (1985) Uncertainty relation for resolution in space. Spatial frequency and orientation optimized by two-dimensional visual cortical filters. J Optic Soc Am A 2(7):1160–1169
DeValois R, Albrecht D, Thorell L (1982) Spatial frequency selectivity of cells in macaque visual cortex. Vis Res 22:545–559
Durand J-B et al (2007) Anterior regions of monkey parietal cortex process visual 3D shape. Neuron 55:493–505
Field D (1987) Relations Between the Statistics of Natural Images and the Response Properties of Cortical Cells. Journal of Optical Society of American A 4:2379–2393
Fleet D, Wagner H, Heeger D (1996) Neural encoding of binocular disparity: energy models, position shifts and phase shifts. Vis Res 36(12):1839–1857
Hawken M, Parker A (1987) Spatial properties of neurons in the monkey striate cortex. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 231:251–288
Hegde J, Van Essen D (2005) Role of primate visual area V4 in the processing of 3-D shape characteristics defined by disparity. J Neurophysiol 94:2856–2866
Hinkle D, Connor C (2002) Three-dimensional orientation tuning in Macaque area V4. Nat Neurosci 5(7):665–670
Janssen P, Vogels R, Orban G (2000) Three-dimensional shape coding in inferior temporal cortex. Neuron 27(2):385–397
Janssen P et al (2001) Macaque inferior temporal neurons are selective for three-dimensional boundaries and surfaces. J Neurosci 21(23):9419–9429
Jones J, Palmer L (1987) An evaluation of the 2D Gabor Filter model of simple receptive fields in cat striate cortex. J Neurophysiol 58:1233–1258
Julesz B (2006) Foundations of cyclopean perception s.l. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Morrone M, Burr D (1988) Feature detection in human vision: a phase dependent energy model. Proc R Soc Lond B 235:221–245
Nguyenkim J, DeAngelis G (2003) Disparity-based coding of three-dimensional surface orientation by Macaque middle temporal neurons. J Neurosci 23:7117–7218
Ohzawa I, DeAngelis G, Freeman R (1990) Stereoscopic depth discrimination in the visual cortex: neurons ideally suited as disparity detectors. Science 249:1037–1041
Pollard S, Mayhew J, Frisby J (1985) PMF: a stereo correspondence algorithm using a disparity gradient limit. Perception 14:449–470
Pollen D, Ronner S (1981) Phase relationships between adjacent simple cells in the visual cortex. Science 212:1409–1411
Qian N (1994) Ning Qian, computing stereo disparity and motion with known binocular cell properties. Neural Comput 6:390–404
Qian N, Mikaelian S (2000) Relationship between phase and energy methods for disparity computation. Neural Comput 12:279–292
Read J (2002) A Bayesian model of stereopsis depth and motion direction discrimination. Biol Cybern 82:117–136
Read J, Cumming B (2003) Testing quantitative models of binocular disparity selectivity in primary visual cortex. J Neurophysiol 90:2795–2817
Sanada T, Ohzawa I (2006) Encoding of three-dimensional surface slant in cat visual areas 17 and 18. J Neurophysiol 95:2768–2786
Taira M et al (2000) Parietal neurons represent surface orientation from the gradient of binocular disparity. J Neurophysiol 83:3140–3146
Tsai J, Victor J (2003) Reading a population code: a multi-scale neural model for representing binocular disparity. Vis Res 43(4):445–466
Tsutsui K-I, Taira M, Sakata H (2005) Neural mechanisms of three-dimensional vision. Neurosci Res 51:221–229
Tyler C, Sutter E (1979) Depth from spatial frequency difference: an old kind of stereopsis. Vis Res 19:859–865
von der Heydt R, Zhou H, Friedman H (2000) Representation of stereoscopic edges in monkey visual cortex. Vis Res 40:1955–1967
Young R (1987) The Gaussian derivative model for spatial vision: i. retinal mechanisms. Spat Vis 2(4):273–293
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant No. 90820012.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix A: Disparity gradient tuning curve to sinusoidal gratings stimulus
In this appendix, the derivation of the response function of a complex cell to sinusoidal gratings is provided.
The receptive field profile of a simple subunit in the disparity energy model can be represented by a one-dimensional (1-D) Gabor function
where \( \sigma ,\omega_{0} ,\phi \) are, respectively, Gaussian scale, preferred angular frequency and phase of the cell. \( x_{0} \) is the position of Gaussian peak and set to be zero \( \left( {x_{0} = 0} \right) \) without loss of generality.
The receptive field profiles of left and right eye can be described as:
where \( k \) is the spatial frequency ratio between right and left receptive field. \( \Updelta x \) and \( \Updelta \phi \) are interocular position and phase difference, respectively.
Given Eq. 3, the corresponding image patch within the receptive field is
which is equivalent to
If \( \hat{I}\left( \omega \right) \) is the Fourier transform of \( I\left( x \right), \) then we have
According to the disparity energy model, the response of a complex cell is the linear summation of the responses of its monocular unit:
Substitute Eq. A2, A3, A4 and A5 into the above equation yields
In the deduction, the following equality is used:
For a sinusoidal grating stimulus, its transfer function contains only two frequency components and its Fourier phase changes linearly in related to the frequency.
where \( \delta \left( \omega \right) \) is the Dirac’s delta function and \( a \) is a constant.
By making use of Eqs. A7 and A8, and let mean disparity, interocular position and phase difference to be zero, Eq. A6 can be simplified as
Appendix B: Disparity gradient tuning curve to broadband stimulus
In this appendix, we give the derivation of the response function of our model cell to broadband stimuli such as random dot patterns and illumination bars.
The log-Gabor filter can be expressed in the spatial frequency domain as
where \( \sigma_{\omega } \) is the Gaussian scale that controls the spatial frequency bandwidth of the filter. \( \omega_{0} \) is the preferred angular spatial frequency of the cell. \( x_{0} \) is the retinal position of the receptive field center and \( \phi \) is the carrier phase.
With Eq. B1, the left and right receptive field profile in the spatial frequency domain is
where \( x_{c} \) is the retinal position of the receptive field center (we let \( x_{c} = 1 \) throughout this paper), \( k \) is the spatial frequency ratio between the right and left receptive field (see Eq. 2).
For a stimulus with a mean disparity \( d_{0} \) and a constant disparity gradient \( \Updelta d, \) its left and right images in logarithmic scale can be expressed as
If the mean disparity is known beforehand, it can be nullified by shifting the left retinal image by \( d_{0} . \) Therefore without loss of generality, we assume \( d_{0} = 0. \) Given the above equations, the Fourier transform of left and right retinal image in logarithmic scale can be written as
The response of a complex cell is the power of the sum of the left and right monocular response, which can be written in logarithmic spatial frequency domain with Parseval’s theorem as
Let
Substituting Eqs. B2, B3, B4 and B5 into Eq. B7 and separating the magnitude and phase of the stimulus with
We have
According to the physiological data of Pollen and Ronner (1981), the spatial frequency ratio \( (k) \) is within one-fourth octave. This means \( 0.84 \le k \le 1.19. \) In addition, it is shown in Fig. 9 of Sanada and Ohzawa (2006) that the frequency ratios of most cells concentrate around unit. Therefore, it can be reasonably assumed that the frequency ratio \( k \) is not too far away from unit. In this case, the response of a model complex cell \( \left( R \right) \) can be approximated as
With sum-to-product trigonometric identity, we have
By the theorem that the square of a single integration is equivalent to a double integration
The previous result can be simplified as
where
Equation B8 is a general expression of the response of our model complex cell and can be further specialized for a particular stimulus if the property of that stimulus in frequency domain is available.
For a broadband stimulus, its Fourier magnitude remains approximately constant across the whole spatial frequency domain and is independent of its phase. Therefore we let
Also note that \( \alpha \) in Eq. B9 is usually not a constant since the Fourier phase is random. Therefore Eq. B10 is an approximated specialization of Eq. B8 by letting \( \alpha = 1. \)
Bar stimulus can be represented by a delta function
And its Fourier transform is
Thanks to its linear Fourier phase, \( \alpha \) of Eq. B9 is as a constant. Substitute this result into Eq. B8 yields Eq. B10 but with \( \rho = 1. \)
About this article
Cite this article
Yu, L., Hu, Z. Modeling neuronal response to disparity gradient. Soft Comput 13, 1175–1185 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-009-0423-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-009-0423-3