ArticleNature communications2021
Opposing effects of selectivity and invariance in peripheral vision.
Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification of letters distorted by physiologically-inspired spatial scrambling.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Behavioral techniques for controlling visual stimuli to modulate visual processing in the brain and their implementation in augmented reality technology.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Peripheral overconfidence in a scene categorization task.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- The visibility of Eidolon distortions in things and stuff.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Adaptation with Naturalistic Textures in Macaque V1 and V2.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Responses of neurons in macaque V4 to object and texture images.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Embodied neuromorphic synergy for lighting-robust machine vision to see in extreme bright.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Color crowding considered as adaptive spatial integration.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Neuronal and Behavioral Responses to Naturalistic Texture Images in Macaque Monkeys.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Normalization by orientation-tuned surround in human V1-V3.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Model metamers reveal divergent invariances between biological and artificial neural networks.Nature neuroscience · 2023Article
- Sensitivity to naturalistic texture relies primarily on high spatial frequencies.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Feature representation under crowding in macaque V1 and V4 neuronal populations.Current biology : CB · 2022Article
- Global and high-level effects in crowding cannot be predicted by either high-dimensional pooling or target cueing.Journal of vision · 2021Article
- Opposing effects of selectivity and invariance in peripheral vision.Nature communications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Sensory processing necessitates discarding some information in service of preserving and reformatting more behaviorally relevant information. Sensory neurons seem to achieve this by responding selectively to particular combinations of features in their inputs, while averaging over or ignoring irrelevant combinations. Here, we expose the perceptual implications of this tradeoff between selectivity and invariance, using stimuli and tasks that explicitly reveal their opposing effects on discrimination performance. We generate texture stimuli with statistics derived from natural photographs, and ask observers to perform two different tasks: Discrimination between images drawn from families with different statistics, and discrimination between image samples with identical statistics. For both tasks, the performance of an ideal observer improves with stimulus size. In contrast, humans become better at family discrimination but worse at sample discrimination. We demonstrate through simulations that these behaviors arise naturally in an observer model that relies on a common set of physiologically plausible local statistical measurements for both tasks.
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.