Neurophysical Model by Barten and Its Development

Similar documents
Visual Acuity. Adler s Physiology of the Eye 11th Ed. Chapter 33 - by Dennis Levi.

Computational Perception. Visual Coding 3

Exercise: Simulating spatial processing in the visual pathway with convolution

OPTI-521 Graduate Report 2 Matthew Risi Tutorial: Introduction to imaging, and estimate of image quality degradation from optical surfaces

Modeling the top neuron layers of the human retina. Laurens Koppenol ( ) Universiteit Utrecht

( ) = First Bessel function, x = π Dθ

Visual Pathways to the Brain

Improving visual function diagnostic metrics. Charles Campbell

IMAGE DE-NOISING IN WAVELET DOMAIN

Formulas of possible interest

Visual Acuity. Visual acuity

2012 Imaging Science Ph.D. Comprehensive Examination June 15, :00AM to 1:00PM IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS

Determining Wave-Optics Mesh Parameters for Complex Optical Systems

Visual Acuity. Excerpts from a lecture by: Harold E. Bedell. Physiological Optics & Vision Science

POVS Basic Vision Science Core. Visual Acuity

CS6670: Computer Vision

Diffraction. Single-slit diffraction. Diffraction by a circular aperture. Chapter 38. In the forward direction, the intensity is maximal.

Capturing the sampling effects: a TOD sensor performance model

Determining Wave-Optics Mesh Parameters for Modeling Complex Systems of Simple Optics

CS4670: Computer Vision

CSE 167: Lecture #6: Color. Jürgen P. Schulze, Ph.D. University of California, San Diego Fall Quarter 2012

Diffraction. Introduction: Diffraction is bending of waves around an obstacle (barrier) or spreading of waves passing through a narrow slit.

Spectral Color and Radiometry

2.710 Optics Spring 09 Solutions to Problem Set #1 Posted Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2009

TEAMS National Competition High School Version Photometry 25 Questions

CSE 167: Lecture #6: Color. Jürgen P. Schulze, Ph.D. University of California, San Diego Fall Quarter 2011

Representing the World

Digital Image Fundamentals

Adaptive Image Sampling Based on the Human Visual System

ELEC Dr Reji Mathew Electrical Engineering UNSW

Refined Measurement of Digital Image Texture Loss Peter D. Burns Burns Digital Imaging Fairport, NY USA

Gaussian Beam Calculator for Creating Coherent Sources

CS6670: Computer Vision

Lenses lens equation (for a thin lens) = (η η ) f r 1 r 2

Image Sampling and Quantisation

Image Sampling & Quantisation

Computer Graphics. Sampling Theory & Anti-Aliasing. Philipp Slusallek

3. Image formation, Fourier analysis and CTF theory. Paula da Fonseca

TEAMS National Competition Middle School Version Photometry 25 Questions

Resolution of Temporal-Multiplexing and Spatial-Multiplexing Stereoscopic Televisions

Vision: From Eye to Brain (Chap 3)

Chapter 37. Wave Optics

MEASUREMENT OF THE WAVELENGTH WITH APPLICATION OF A DIFFRACTION GRATING AND A SPECTROMETER

Chapter 38 Wave Optics (II)

Image Formation. CS418 Computer Graphics Eric Shaffer.

Image Formation. Camera trial #1. Pinhole camera. What is an Image? Light and the EM spectrum The H.V.S. and Color Perception

Allan Variance Analysis of Random Noise Modes in Gyroscopes

EXAM SOLUTIONS. Computer Vision Course 2D1420 Thursday, 11 th of march 2003,

GEOG 4110/5100 Advanced Remote Sensing Lecture 2

Colour computer vision: fundamentals, applications and challenges. Dr. Ignacio Molina-Conde Depto. Tecnología Electrónica Univ.

Estimating the wavelength composition of scene illumination from image data is an

International Journal of Computer Science Trends and Technology (IJCST) Volume 3 Issue 1, Jan-Feb 2015

Lecture 4 Recap of PHYS110-1 lecture Physical Optics - 4 lectures EM spectrum and colour Light sources Interference and diffraction Polarization

Lens Design I. Lecture 11: Imaging Herbert Gross. Summer term

Chapter 36. Diffraction. Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.

Advanced Computer Graphics. Aliasing. Matthias Teschner. Computer Science Department University of Freiburg

Wallace Hall Academy

Understanding Fraunhofer Diffraction

Multicomponent land data pre-processing for FWI: a benchmark dataset

Computer Vision. The image formation process

Optimal disparity estimation in natural stereo- images (Supplement) Johannes Burge & Wilson S. Geisler

Human Perception of Objects

Simple Spatial Domain Filtering

Geometric Fourier Analysis in Computational Vision

Light. Properties of light. What is light? Today What is light? How do we measure it? How does light propagate? How does light interact with matter?

Scanner Parameter Estimation Using Bilevel Scans of Star Charts

Extracting Wavefront Error From Shack-Hartmann Images Using Spatial Demodulation

Color and Shading. Color. Shapiro and Stockman, Chapter 6. Color and Machine Vision. Color and Perception

Chapter 37. Interference of Light Waves

Wave Phenomena Physics 15c. Lecture 19 Diffraction

Optics of Vision. MATERIAL TO READ Web: 1.

Chapter 34. Thin Lenses

Electricity & Optics

Laser sensors. Transmitter. Receiver. Basilio Bona ROBOTICA 03CFIOR

Announcements. Light. Properties of light. Light. Project status reports on Wednesday. Readings. Today. Readings Szeliski, 2.2, 2.3.

Problem μ Max Min

Photo-realistic Renderings for Machines Seong-heum Kim

Control of Light. Emmett Ientilucci Digital Imaging and Remote Sensing Laboratory Chester F. Carlson Center for Imaging Science 8 May 2007

Wave Optics. April 11, 2014 Chapter 34 1

Advanced PIV algorithms Why and when advanced PIV algorithms?

Optics Vac Work MT 2008

Spectrographs. C. A. Griffith, Class Notes, PTYS 521, 2016 Not for distribution.

E x Direction of Propagation. y B y

Stable simulations of illumination patterns caused by focusing of sunlight by water waves

1 Laboratory #4: Division-of-Wavefront Interference

Physics 123 Optics Review

CS5670: Computer Vision

(0, 1, 1) (0, 1, 1) (0, 1, 0) What is light? What is color? Terminology

Lens Design I. Lecture 3: Properties of optical systems II Herbert Gross. Summer term

Computer Vision I. Announcements. Fourier Tansform. Efficient Implementation. Edge and Corner Detection. CSE252A Lecture 13.

Image restoration. Restoration: Enhancement:

Contrast Optimization A new way to optimize performance Kenneth Moore, Technical Fellow

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Michelson Interferometer

Digital Image Processing COSC 6380/4393

PHYS 202 Notes, Week 8

DIFFRACTION 4.1 DIFFRACTION Difference between Interference and Diffraction Classification Of Diffraction Phenomena

FRED Slit Diffraction Application Note

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Transcription:

Chapter 14 Neurophysical Model by Barten and Its Development According to the Barten model, the perceived foveal image is corrupted by internal noise caused by statistical fluctuations, both in the number of photons that trigger photoreceptor excitation and in the signal transport from photoreceptors to the brain. While the former effect is easily identified with the photon shot noise intrinsic to any luminous flux, the latter effect is related to the process of subdivision and recombination of photocurrents generated by each individual cone. These photocurrents create a parallel stream of information that is conveyed through the complex mesh of neural cells (horizontal, bipolar, amacrine, and ganglion) that form the retina brain connection. 1 Thus, fluctuations in the electrical/biochemical transport through such parallel pathways result in small differences in the image elements arriving at the brain (neural noise). The overall effect of noise establishes a threshold level below which an image cannot be perceived or distinguished without a high probability of error. The process can be compared to the common experience of image degradation induced by fog in open air, relative to a clear atmosphere, or by flicker in a television image. The disturbance (fog or flicker) plays the role of noise externally added to an otherwise sharp scene, and limits the resolving capability of our visual perception. The Barten model is based on the following simple relationship: m(ψ) MTF T (ψ) = SNR N T (ψ), (14.1) which states that, at the perception threshold, modulation m(ψ) at angular spatial frequency ψ of the object being observed, filtered by the total MTF (MTF T ) of the eye brain system, must overcome the total noise level N T (ψ) at the same frequency by a suitable factor, represented by the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). In general, the object imaged by the eye can be any pattern of structural and chromatic complexity; however, 169

170 Chapter 14 it is mathematically convenient to refer to black-and-white sinusoidal luminance gratings of variable spatial frequency that form the base for spectral decomposition of any 2D object. In this case, modulation m(ψ) also termed Michelson contrast c(ψ) is defined as m(ψ) = c(ψ) = L(ψ) max L(ψ) min L(ψ) max + L(ψ) min, (14.2) which ( is the amplitude of the sinusoidal variation of luminance L(ψ)max ) ( L(ψ) min 2 divided by average luminance L(ψ)max ) +L(ψ) min 2. In Eq. (14.1), MTF T appears in modulus form (even if unnecessary by definition) to stress that possible sign reversal must not be included, as all of the other parameters in the equation are positively defined quantities. By choosing sinusoidal gratings, modulation m(ψ) of Eq. (14.1) takes the meaning of threshold modulation function TMF(ψ), that is, the smallest modulation of a sinusoidal luminance grating that can be recognized by an observer (a physical parameter that is easily quantified in human eyes through the usual measurement of CS at some fixed spatial frequencies). Figure 14.1 shows a representation of the effect of noise at various values of SNR (, 5, 3, and 2) on the visibility of sinusoidal gratings for a single spatial frequency and various contrast levels (c = 1; 0.3; and 0.1). In each frame of Fig. 14.1, the scale is such that the entire frame linear size corresponds to 100 arcmin, and the pixel size (visible in noisy patterns) is equivalent to the cone spacing in the fovea center (about 0.5 arcmin). The spatial frequency represented in Fig. 14.1 thus corresponds to 12 cpd. By adopting convenient expressions for MTF T (ψ) and N T (ψ) (illustrated in the following), Barten was able to solve Eq. (14.1) for m(ψ) TMF(ψ), and to derive an adequate formula for CSF(ψ), the reciprocal function of TMF(ψ): CSF(ψ) 1 TMF(ψ) = MTF T (ψ) SNR N T (ψ), (14.3) where all functions are implicitly assumed to also depend on wavelength λ. By means of Eq. (14.3), Barten successfully fit a number of experimental data series of CS taken from the literature. 14.1 Total MTF In the Barten model outlined in Eq. (14.3), MTF T refers to the overall spatial filtering experienced by the visual signal in the complete transport chain through the eye, along the optical nerve up to the brain. It is made up of three contributions: optical component MTF O, pertinent to the refractive media of the eye; retinal component MTF R, describing the

Neurophysical Model by Barten and Its Development 171 Figure 14.1 Visualization of the effect of noise on the detectability of sinusoidal gratings, for three values of contrast (c = 1; 0.3; and 0.1), and four levels of SNR (SNR ; 5; 3; and 2). Assuming that the pixel size in each frame corresponds to the cone spacing in the fovea ( 0.4 arcmin), the sinusoidal bars are 1.5 deg long and spatial frequency is 12 cpd.

172 Chapter 14 discrete sampling structure of the fovea; and neural component MTF N, characterizing the filtering action suffered by the visual signal in its transport along neurons from photoreceptors to the brain. Thus, MTF T is given by MTF T (ψ) = MTF O (ψ) MTF R (ψ) MTF N (ψ). (14.4) The retinal and neural components are assumed to be wavelength independent. 14.1.1 Optical MTF In his analysis of CS data, Barten adopted a simple heuristic formula to represent MTF O of the ocular refractive media: MT F O (ψ) = e 2π2 [σ 2 0 +(C D ent) 2 ]ψ 2, given by a Gaussian function with a line width inversely dependent on pupil size, to account for spherical and chromatic aberrations. In this expression, σ 0 and C are constant parameters, and D ent is the size of the entrance pupil. Despite the simplicity of the model, the visual agreement of the data fits he obtained was remarkably good. MTF line width σ 0 was left as a fitting parameter, to be freely adjusted for maximum adherence of model to data. However, a better solution is represented by use of expressions for MTF O calculated with a physical optics approach. In the present context, MTF O (ψ) is given by the numerical results obtained for the CAGE eye model and described in Part IB. The resulting shape of MTF O then depends only on the size of entrance pupil D ent, the spectral composition of the visual stimulus, and amount of defocus. 14.1.2 Retinal MTF The sampling action provided by foveal cones on the luminance signal falling onto the retina alters the signal by transforming its spatial distribution from continuous to step-wise, thus introducing a limit to visual resolution due to the cone mosaic. Barten did not specify a formula for MTF R, but instead included it into his heuristic MTF O. In the present case, a suitable expression for the sampling function can be easily devised. Assume for simplicity that the incident foveal irradiance is actually the line spread function LSF(θ), with θ being the angular coordinate, so that its Fourier transform directly results in MTF O. Suppose further that foveal cones are regularly distributed in a 2D arrangement, each one having angular width W and spacing S (centerto-center angular distance). Finally, assume that in the sampling process, foveal irradiance is spatially integrated across the cone aperture and is lost in the dead zone between adjacent photoreceptors. Mathematically,

Neurophysical Model by Barten and Its Development 173 the sampled LSF can be written as 2 LSF R (θ) = Σ(θ) δ k (θ ks ), (14.5) where δ(θ) is Dirac delta function, and the sampling function Σ(θ) is given by Σ(θ) = 1 ( ) θ u LSF(u) rect du W W/2 = 1 ( )} θ {LSF(θ), W conv rect. (14.6) W/2 In this formula, rect ( θ W/2) defines the finite unitary impulse function of width W (see Appendix A), and conv represents the convolution operator. In this way, Σ(θ) is continuously defined on the θ axis, while LSF R (θ) is defined only at the center of each photoreceptor (or pixel). The corresponding MTF R (θ) after sampling can thus be evaluated as 3 ( MTF R (ψ) = FT {LSF R (θ)} = MTF ψ k ) [ S sinc πw k k ( ψ k )]. S (14.7) As a consequence of sampling, the original double-sided spectrum MTF(ψ) is attenuated by the sinc ( ) function (FT of the active sampling window of size W), and replicated at frequency intervals k/s (where 1/S is the sampling or Nyquist angular frequency). Given that the domain of MTF(ψ) is [ ψ 0, ψ 0 ], with ψ 0 = D ex λ, (D ex being the size of the exit pupil), then aliasing, that is, the overlap of adjacent spectral orders, occurs whenever 2ψ 0 > 1 S that is, D ex > λ 2S. Numerical values for S and W can be obtained from the literature. The classical work by Curcio and Allen 4 provides a mean value for the maximum density of foveal cones of 210,000 mm 2 (range: 120,000 to 324,000), confirmed by a recent measurement of 199,200 mm 2 (Ref. 5). By adopting density value n C = 200,000 mm 2 with a retinal magnification factor given by γ = 4.96 µm/arcmin (see Section 10.1) the cone spacing for a square cell arrangement becomes S = 103 γ n C 0.45 arcmin. For a pattern of hexagonal cells, the separation between 3 adjacent cell rows is given by S = 103 γ 2n C 0.42 arcmin. Assuming 30% for the fraction of dead space between adjacent cones yields W = 0.35 arcmin. By comparing Eqs. (14.4) and (14.7), the retinal MTF R of Eq. (14.4) can be set equal (for order k = 0) to MTF R (ψ) = sinc(πwψ).