pression - cns.nyu.edumsl/posters/yiltizetal18.pdf · pression iltiz 1 .Heeger 1,2ichael S. Landy...
1
Contingent adaptation in masking and surround suppression Hörmet Yiltiz 1 , David J. Heeger 1,2 , Michael S. Landy 1,2 1 Department of Psychology, 2 Center for Neural Science, New York University Reference 1. Westrick et al., J Neurosci, 2016. 2. Aschner et al., SFN, 2016. Acknowledgements Supported by NIH EY 08266. Contact [email protected] Available online: http://hyiltiz.com/VSS2018.pdf O C I E T Y I S I O N C I E N C E S V S S 2018 Detection and cross-orientation suppression Appearance and surround suppression Introduction Hebbian normalization model of adap- tation 1 : neurons that fire together more often inhibit each other more. Hypothesis Contingent adaptation: presenting stimuli synchronously leads to greater suppression compared to asynchronous presentation. • Demonstrated in macaque physiology. • Untested in humans. Conclusion • Contingent adaptation raises detection threshold and changes appearance. • Supports the Hebbian normalization model. • Adapt: non-contingent or contingent • Measure: threshold contrast for detecting a masked grating or or Same Opposite Opposite Opposite Same Same Which center has higher contrast? Matching Non-matching 5Hz or Non-contingent Contingent Which side has an extra grating? 3 o 1.5 o Matching Non-matching Contingent adaptation results in stronger cross-orientation suppression and thus in- creased masked detection thresholds. 0.3 0.5 ±15 o Matched contrast The center grating appears to have lower contrast when it matches the adapter, thus requires higher physical con- trast to match the other center grating. Observer ±45 o Observer ±45 o Threshold contrast ±15 o 0.1 0.03 Adapt Test Adapt Test • Adapt: vary center-surround contingency • Measure: perceived matching contrast 5Hz 0.001 0.1 0.4 0.5 1 Target contrast Accuracy ±15 o * * * * * * * * *
Transcript of pression - cns.nyu.edumsl/posters/yiltizetal18.pdf · pression iltiz 1 .Heeger 1,2ichael S. Landy...
Contingent adaptation in masking and surround suppressionHörmet Yiltiz1 , David J. Heeger1,2, Michael S. Landy1,2
1Department of Psychology, 2Center for Neural Science, New York University
Reference1. Westrick et al., J Neurosci, 2016.2. Aschner et al., SFN, 2016.
AcknowledgementsSupported by NIH EY 08266.
[email protected] online: http://hyiltiz.com/VSS2018.pdf
O C
I E
T Y I S I O N
C I E N C E S
VS S
2018
Detection and cross-orientation suppression Appearance and surround suppressionIntroductionHebbian normalization model of adap-tation1: neurons that fire together more often inhibit each other more.
HypothesisContingent adaptation: presenting stimuli synchronously leads to greater suppression compared to asynchronous presentation.• Demonstrated in macaque physiology.• Untested in humans.
Conclusion• Contingent adaptation raises detection
threshold and changes appearance. • Supports the Hebbian normalization
model.
• Adapt: non-contingent or contingent • Measure: threshold contrast for detecting a masked grating
or or
Same Opposite
Opposite Opposite Same Same
Which center has higher contrast?Matching Non-matching
5Hz
or
Non-contingent Contingent
Which side has an extra grating?
3o
1.5o
MatchingNon-matching
Contingent adaptation results in stronger cross-orientation suppression and thus in-creased masked detection thresholds.
0.3
0.5
±15o
Mat
ched
con
tras
t
The center grating appears to have lower contrast when it matches the adapter, thus requires higher physical con-trast to match the other center grating.
Observer
±45o
Observer
±45o
Thre
shol
d co
ntra
st
±15o
0.1
0.03
Adapt
Test
Adapt
Test
• Adapt: vary center-surround contingency• Measure: perceived matching contrast
5Hz
0.001 0.1 0.40.5
1
Target contrast
Acc
urac
y
±15o
* * * * * * * * *
