Literature DB >> 15208013

Storage for free: a surprising property of a simple gain-control model of motion aftereffects.

Wim A van de Grind1, Maarten J van der Smagt, Frans A J Verstraten.   

Abstract

If a motion aftereffect (MAE) for given adaptation conditions has a duration T s, and the eyes are closed after adaptation during a waiting period tw=T s before testing, an unexpected MAE of a 'residual' duration TrT s is experienced. This effect is called 'storage' and it is often quantified by a storage factor sigma=TrT/T, which can reach values up to about 0.7-0.8. The phenomenon and its name have invited explanations in terms of inhibition of recovery during darkness. We present a model based on the opposite idea, that an effective test stimulus quickens recovery relative to darkness or other ineffective test stimuli. The model is worked out in mathematical detail and proves to explain 'storage' data from the literature, on the static MAE (sMAE: an MAE experienced for static test stimuli). We also present results of a psychophysical experiment with moving random pixel arrays, quantifying storage phenomena both for the sMAE and the dynamic MAE (dMAE: an MAE experienced for a random dynamic noise test stimulus). Storage factors for the dMAE are lower than for the sMAE. Our model also gives an excellent description of these new data on storage of the dMAE. The term 'storage' might therefore be a misnomer. If an effective test stimulus influences all direction tuned motion sensors indiscriminately and thus speeds up equalization of gains, one gets the storage phenomenon for free.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15208013     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2004.04.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  11 in total

1.  Motion aftereffects specific to surface depth order: beyond binocular disparity.

Authors:  Wonyeong Sohn; Adriane E Seiffert
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2006-02-07       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  The surface and deep structure of the waterfall illusion.

Authors:  Nicholas J Wade; Martina Ziefle
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2008-10-08

3.  Experience-driven plasticity in binocular vision.

Authors:  P Christiaan Klink; Jan W Brascamp; Randolph Blake; Richard J A van Wezel
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2010-07-30       Impact factor: 10.834

Review 4.  A review of visual aftereffects in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Katharine N Thakkar; Steven M Silverstein; Jan W Brascamp
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2019-03-30       Impact factor: 8.989

Review 5.  The motion aftereffect reloaded.

Authors:  George Mather; Andrea Pavan; Gianluca Campana; Clara Casco
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 20.229

6.  Response normalization and blur adaptation: data and multi-scale model.

Authors:  Sarah L Elliott; Mark A Georgeson; Michael A Webster
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2011-02-09       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  A motion-energy model predicts the direction discrimination and MAE duration of two-stroke apparent motion at high and low retinal illuminance.

Authors:  Kirsten L Challinor; George Mather
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Dynamics of spatial distortions reveal multiple time scales of motion adaptation.

Authors:  Neil W Roach; Paul V McGraw
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-10-07       Impact factor: 2.714

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

Authors:  Andrea Pavan; Adriano Contillo; George Mather
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Weaker signals induce more precise temporal-integration.

Authors:  Yoshiaki Tsushima
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.