Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41145508›Full record

ArticleNature communications2025

Resolution limit of the eye - how many pixels can we see?

Maliha Ashraf, Alexandre Chapiro, Rafał K Mantiuk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Maliha AshrafDepartment of Computer Science and Technology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8142-5611
Alexandre ChapiroMeta, Applied Perception Science, Sunnyvale, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7367-0131
Rafał K MantiukDepartment of Computer Science and Technology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. rafal.mantiuk@cl.cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2353-0349

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As large engineering efforts go towards improving the resolution of mobile, augmented reality (AR), and virtual reality (VR) displays, it is important to know the maximum resolution at which further improvements bring no noticeable benefit. This limit is often referred to as the retinal resolution, although the limiting factor may not necessarily be attributed to the retina. To determine the ultimate resolution at which an image appears sharp to our eyes with no perceivable blur, we created an experimental setup with a sliding display, which allows for continuous control of the resolution. The lack of such control was the main limitation of the previous studies. We measure achromatic (black-white) and chromatic (red-green and yellow-violet) resolution limits for foveal vision, and at two eccentricities (10° and 20°). Our results demonstrate that the resolution limit is higher than what was previously believed, reaching 94 pixels per degree (ppd) for foveal achromatic vision, 89 ppd for red-green patterns, and 53 ppd for yellow-violet patterns. We also observe a much larger drop in the resolution limit for chromatic patterns (red-green and yellow-violet) than for achromatic patterns. Our results provide quantitative benchmarks for display development, with implications for future imaging, rendering, and video coding technologies.

Identifiers

PMID41145508
PMCPMC12559231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.