ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2007
Correlation versus gradient type motion detectors: the pros and cons.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Illusory speeding-up and slowing-down of objects moving at constant speed emerges from natural motion detection algorithms.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Common circuit design in fly and mammalian motion vision.Nature neuroscience · 2015Review
- Bursts and isolated spikes code for opposite movement directions in midbrain electrosensory neurons.PloS one · 2012Article
- Coding movement direction by burst firing in electrosensory neurons.Journal of neurophysiology · 2011Article
- Motion perception and visual signal design in Anolis lizards.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2010Article
- The spatial frequency tuning of optic-flow-dependent behaviors in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens.The Journal of experimental biology · 2010Article
- 3-Dimensional Scene Perception during Active Electrolocation in a Weakly Electric Pulse Fish.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2010Article
- Differences in the time course of short-term depression across receptive fields are correlated with directional selectivity in electrosensory neurons.Journal of neurophysiology · 2009Article
- Robust models for optic flow coding in natural scenes inspired by insect biology.PLoS computational biology · 2009Article
- Introduction. The use of artificial neural networks to study perception in animals.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2007Article
- Neural networks for perceptual processing: from simulation tools to theories.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2007Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual motion contains a wealth of information about self-motion as well as the three-dimensional structure of the environment. Therefore, it is of utmost importance for any organism with eyes. However, visual motion information is not explicitly represented at the photoreceptor level, but rather has to be computed by the nervous system from the changing retinal images as one of the first processing steps. Two prominent models have been proposed to account for this neural computation: the Reichardt detector and the gradient detector. While the Reichardt detector correlates the luminance levels derived from two adjacent image points, the gradient detector provides an estimate of the local retinal image velocity by dividing the spatial and the temporal luminance gradient. As a consequence of their different internal processing structure, both the models differ in a number of functional aspects such as their dependence on the spatial-pattern structure as well as their sensitivity to photon noise. These different properties lead to the proposal that an ideal motion detector should be of Reichardt type at low luminance levels, but of gradient type at high luminance levels. However, experiments on the fly visual systems provided unambiguous evidence in favour of the Reichardt detector under all luminance conditions. Does this mean that the fly nervous system uses suboptimal computations, or is there a functional aspect missing in the optimality criterion? In the following, I will argue in favour of the latter, showing that Reichardt detectors have an automatic gain control allowing them to dynamically adjust their input-output relationships to the statistical range of velocities presented, while gradient detectors do not have this property. As a consequence, Reichardt detectors, but not gradient detectors, always provide a maximum amount of information about stimulus velocity over a large range of velocities. This important property might explain why Reichardt type of computations have been demonstrated to underlie the extraction of motion information in the fly visual system under all luminance levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.