Literature DB >> 17136526

A Bayesian model of the disambiguation of gravitoinertial force by visual cues.

Paul R MacNeilage1, Martin S Banks, Daniel R Berger, Heinrich H Bülthoff.   

Abstract

The otoliths are stimulated in the same fashion by gravitational and inertial forces, so otolith signals are ambiguous indicators of self-orientation. The ambiguity can be resolved with added visual information indicating orientation and acceleration with respect to the earth. Here we present a Bayesian model of the statistically optimal combination of noisy vestibular and visual signals. Likelihoods associated with sensory measurements are represented in an orientation/acceleration space. The likelihood function associated with the otolith signal illustrates the ambiguity; there is no unique solution for self-orientation or acceleration. Likelihood functions associated with other sensory signals can resolve this ambiguity. In addition, we propose two priors, each acting on a dimension in the orientation/acceleration space: the idiotropic prior and the no-acceleration prior. We conducted experiments using a motion platform and attached visual display to examine the influence of visual signals on the interpretation of the otolith signal. Subjects made pitch and acceleration judgments as the vestibular and visual signals were manipulated independently. Predictions of the model were confirmed: (1) visual signals affected the interpretation of the otolith signal, (2) less variable signals had more influence on perceived orientation and acceleration than more variable ones, and (3) combined estimates were more precise than single-cue estimates. We also show that the model can explain some well-known phenomena including the perception of upright in zero gravity, the Aubert effect, and the somatogravic illusion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17136526     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-006-0792-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   2.064


  46 in total

1.  Effects of rotation on somatogravic illusions.

Authors:  C S Lessard; R Matthews; D Yauch
Journal:  IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr

2.  Idiothetic navigation in humans: estimation of path length.

Authors:  M L Mittelstaedt; H Mittelstaedt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Human speed perception is contrast dependent.

Authors:  L S Stone; P Thompson
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 4.  Perception of spatial orientation in microgravity.

Authors:  S Glasauer; H Mittelstaedt
Journal:  Brain Res Brain Res Rev       Date:  1998-11

5.  Tilt perception during dynamic linear acceleration.

Authors:  S H Seidman; L Telford; G D Paige
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  A quantitative study of vestibular adaptation in humans.

Authors:  R Malcolm; G M Jones
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1970-08       Impact factor: 1.494

7.  Humans use internal models to estimate gravity and linear acceleration.

Authors:  D M Merfeld; L Zupan; R J Peterka
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-04-15       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Human ocular torsion and perceived roll responses to linear acceleration.

Authors:  Lionel H Zupan; Daniel M Merfeld
Journal:  J Vestib Res       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.435

9.  Viewing geometry determines how vision and haptics combine in size perception.

Authors:  Sergei Gepshtein; Martin S Banks
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2003-03-18       Impact factor: 10.834

10.  Resolving multisensory conflict: a strategy for balancing the costs and benefits of audio-visual integration.

Authors:  Neil W Roach; James Heron; Paul V McGraw
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-09-07       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  81 in total

1.  Optimal visual-vestibular integration under conditions of conflicting intersensory motion profiles.

Authors:  John S Butler; Jennifer L Campos; Heinrich H Bülthoff
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-11-02       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Multisensory integration in the estimation of walked distances.

Authors:  Jennifer L Campos; John S Butler; Heinrich H Bülthoff
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-03-13       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Characterizing head motion in three planes during combined visual and base of support disturbances in healthy and visually sensitive subjects.

Authors:  E A Keshner; Y Dhaher
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2007-12-26       Impact factor: 2.840

Review 4.  Visuo-motor coordination and internal models for object interception.

Authors:  Myrka Zago; Joseph McIntyre; Patrice Senot; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-01-13       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Perceptual scaling of visual and inertial cues: effects of field of view, image size, depth cues, and degree of freedom.

Authors:  B J Correia Grácio; J E Bos; M M van Paassen; M Mulder
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 6.  Multisensory integration: resolving sensory ambiguities to build novel representations.

Authors:  Andrea M Green; Dora E Angelaki
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 6.627

7.  Body orientation contributes to modelling the effects of gravity for target interception in humans.

Authors:  Barbara La Scaleia; Francesco Lacquaniti; Myrka Zago
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2019-02-06       Impact factor: 5.182

8.  Dynamic reweighting of visual and vestibular cues during self-motion perception.

Authors:  Christopher R Fetsch; Amanda H Turner; Gregory C DeAngelis; Dora E Angelaki
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-12-09       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 9.  Gravity estimation and verticality perception.

Authors:  Christopher J Dakin; Ari Rosenberg
Journal:  Handb Clin Neurol       Date:  2018

Review 10.  Computation of egomotion in the macaque cerebellar vermis.

Authors:  Dora E Angelaki; Tatyana A Yakusheva; Andrea M Green; J David Dickman; Pablo M Blazquez
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.847

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.