Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 1999 Jul 7;266(1426):1361–1365. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0788

Size-disparity correlation in human binocular depth perception.

S J Prince 1, R A Eagle 1
PMCID: PMC1690069  PMID: 10445290

Abstract

To use the small horizontal disparities between images projected to the eyes for the recovery of three-dimensional information, our visual system must first identify which feature in one eye's image corresponds with which in the other. The earliest level of disparity processing in primates (V1) contains cells that are spatial-frequency tuned. If such cells have a disparity range that covers only a single period of their mean tuning frequency, there will always be exactly one potential match within this range. Here, this 'size-disparity' hypothesis was tested by measuring the contrast sensitivity of stereopsis as a function of disparity for single bandpass-filtered items. It was found that thresholds were low and relatively constant up to disparities an order of magnitude larger than is predicted by this constraint. Furthermore, peak sensitivity was relatively independent of spatial frequency. A control experiment showed that binocular correlation of the carrier is necessary for this task. In a third experiment, the maximum disparity that supports threshold performance was compared for an isolated bandpass item and bandpass-filtered noise. This limit was found to be five times larger for the isolated stimuli. In summary, these findings show that the initial stage of disparity detection is not limited by the size-disparity constraint. For stimuli with multiple false targets, however, processes subsequent to this stage reduce the disparity range over which the correspondence problem can be solved.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (374.6 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Cumming B. G., Parker A. J. Responses of primary visual cortical neurons to binocular disparity without depth perception. Nature. 1997 Sep 18;389(6648):280–283. doi: 10.1038/38487. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Eagle R. A., Rogers B. J. Motion detection is limited by element density not spatial frequency. Vision Res. 1996 Feb;36(4):545–558. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(96)89252-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Fleet D. J., Wagner H., Heeger D. J. Neural encoding of binocular disparity: energy models, position shifts and phase shifts. Vision Res. 1996 Jun;36(12):1839–1857. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(95)00313-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hess R. F., Wilcox L. M. Linear and non-linear filtering in stereopsis. Vision Res. 1994 Sep;34(18):2431–2438. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(94)90287-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Marr D., Poggio T. A computational theory of human stereo vision. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1979 May 23;204(1156):301–328. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1979.0029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Mayhew J. E., Frisby J. P. Convergent disparity discriminations in narrow-band-filtered random-dot stereograms. Vision Res. 1979;19(1):63–71. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(79)90122-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ohzawa I., DeAngelis G. C., Freeman R. D. Encoding of binocular disparity by simple cells in the cat's visual cortex. J Neurophysiol. 1996 May;75(5):1779–1805. doi: 10.1152/jn.1996.75.5.1779. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Prince S. J., Eagle R. A., Rogers B. J. Contrast masking reveals spatial-frequency channels in stereopsis. Perception. 1998;27(11):1345–1355. doi: 10.1068/p271345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Schor C. M., Edwards M., Pope D. R. Spatial-frequency and contrast tuning of the transient-stereopsis system. Vision Res. 1998 Oct;38(20):3057–3068. doi: 10.1016/s0042-6989(97)00467-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Schor C. M., Wood I. Disparity range for local stereopsis as a function of luminance spatial frequency. Vision Res. 1983;23(12):1649–1654. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(83)90179-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Simmons D. R., Kingdom F. A. Differences between stereopsis with isoluminant and isochromatic stimuli. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 1995 Oct;12(10):2094–2104. doi: 10.1364/josaa.12.002094. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Smallman H. S., MacLeod D. I. Size-disparity correlation in stereopsis at contrast threshold. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 1994 Aug;11(8):2169–2183. doi: 10.1364/josaa.11.002169. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Wilcox L. M., Hess R. F. Is the site of non-linear filtering in stereopsis before or after binocular combination? Vision Res. 1996 Feb;36(3):391–399. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(95)00110-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Yang Y., Blake R. Spatial frequency tuning of human stereopsis. Vision Res. 1991;31(7-8):1177–1189. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(91)90043-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES