Population receptive field (pRF) measurements of chromatic responses in human visual cortex using fMRI.

The spatial sensitivity of the human visual system depends on stimulus color: achromatic gratings can be resolved at relatively high spatial frequencies while sensitivity to isoluminant color contrast tends to be more low-pass. Models of early spatial vision often assume that the receptive field size of pattern-sensitive neurons is correlated with their spatial frequency sensitivity - larger receptive fields are typically associated with lower optimal spatial frequency. A strong prediction of this model is that neurons coding isoluminant chromatic patterns should have, on average, a larger receptive field size than neurons sensitive to achromatic patterns. Here, we test this assumption using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We show that while spatial frequency sensitivity depends on chromaticity in the manner predicted by behavioral measurements, population receptive field (pRF) size measurements show no such dependency. At any given eccentricity, the mean pRF size for neuronal populations driven by luminance, opponent red/green and S-cone isolating contrast, are identical. Changes in pRF size (for example, an increase with eccentricity and visual area hierarchy) are also identical across the three chromatic conditions. These results suggest that fMRI measurements of receptive field size and spatial resolution can be decoupled under some circumstances - potentially reflecting a fundamental dissociation between these parameters at the level of neuronal populations.

In primary visual cortex fMRI responses to chromatic and achromatic stimuli are interdependent and predict contrast detection thresholds.

Chromatic and achromatic signals in primary visual cortex have historically been considered independent of each other but have since shown evidence of interdependence. Here, we investigated the combination of two components of a stimulus; an achromatic dynamically changing check background and a chromatic (L-M or S cone) target grating. We found that combinations of chromatic and achromatic signals in primary visual cortex were interdependent, with the dynamic range of responses to chromatic contrast decreasing as achromatic contrast increased. A contrast detection threshold study also revealed interdependence of background and target, with increasing chromatic contrast detection thresholds as achromatic background contrast increased. A model that incorporated a normalising effect of achromatic contrast on chromatic responses, but not vice versa, best predicted our V1 data as well as behavioural thresholds. Further along the visual hierarchy, the dynamic range of chromatic responses was maintained when compared to achromatic responses, which became increasingly compressive.

The distribution of unique green wavelengths and its relationship to macular pigment density.

Monochromatic unique green (UG) is more variable across the population than any other unique hue. Some researchers have reported that this broad distribution of UG settings is bimodal and that the distribution results from the superposition of two or more subpopulations. We have investigated this claim using a Wright colorimeter to measure the unique green wavelength of 58 participants and we have analyzed previous unique green literature by applying a rigorous statistical test to historical datasets. We have also explored the possibility that individual differences in macular pigment density may be responsible for the variation in unique green wavelength. Our results indicate that unique green wavelengths in our population are distributed unimodally and are correlated positively with macular pigment density; individuals with a higher density of macular pigment select longer wavelengths of light as unique green than individuals with a lower density of macular pigment. We model this effect using simulations of monochromatic unique green matching to broadband illuminations and show that matches in the region at approximately 500 nm exhibit particularly high variance both with respect to macular pigment density and also with respect to the precise shape of the broadband reference exemplar spectrum.

The transverse occipital sulcus and intraparietal sulcus show neural selectivity to object-scene size relationships.

To optimize visual search, humans attend to objects with the expected size of the sought target relative to its surrounding scene (object-scene scale consistency). We investigate how the human brain responds to variations in object-scene scale consistency. We use functional magnetic resonance imaging and a voxel-wise feature encoding model to estimate tuning to different object/scene properties. We find that regions involved in scene processing (transverse occipital sulcus) and spatial attention (intraparietal sulcus) have the strongest responsiveness and selectivity to object-scene scale consistency: reduced activity to mis-scaled objects (either unusually smaller or larger). The findings show how and where the brain incorporates object-scene size relationships in the processing of scenes. The response properties of these brain areas might explain why during visual search humans often miss objects that are salient but at atypical sizes relative to the surrounding scene.

Humans, but Not Deep Neural Networks, Often Miss Giant Targets in Scenes.

Even with great advances in machine vision, animals are still unmatched in their ability to visually search complex scenes. Animals from bees [1, 2] to birds [3] to humans [4-12] learn about the statistical relations in visual environments to guide and aid their search for targets. Here, we investigate a novel manner in which humans utilize rapidly acquired information about scenes by guiding search toward likely target sizes. We show that humans often miss targets when their size is inconsistent with the rest of the scene, even when the targets were made larger and more salient and observers fixated the target. In contrast, we show that state-of-the-art deep neural networks do not exhibit such deficits in finding mis-scaled targets but, unlike humans, can be fooled by target-shaped distractors that are inconsistent with the expected target's size within the scene. Thus, it is not a human deficiency to miss targets when they are inconsistent in size with the scene; instead, it is a byproduct of a useful strategy that the brain has implemented to rapidly discount potential distractors.