Color Constancy of V1 Double Opponent Cells to Natural Images
The human visual system perceives colors of objects as largely independent of the lighting conditions even though the spectral composition of the incident light, and thus of the light reflected off objects and reaching the eye, can be very different under different types of lighting (such as midday sun, sunset, fluorescent or incandescent light). The ability to maintain constant perception of object color is called color constancy, and its neural basis remains unknown. Neurons in the retina and lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) do not show response properties consistent with color constancy, indicating that this computation is performed at a subsequent stage of neural processing. The critical computation underlying color constancy is a comparison of the relative cone activations across visual space. Recent studies have confirmed the existence of double-opponent cells in V1 that, in principle, have the appropriate receptive field structure to contribute to color constancy: they are sensitive not to absolute cone responses but rather to differences in cone responses both across cone types (cone opponency) and across space (spatial opponency).
To test the hypothesis that double-opponent cells contribute to color constancy we compare the color constancy of experimentally characterized V1 neurons to that of model LGN neurons and model V1 neurons constructed on the basis of physiological measurements. We use experimentally measured receptive fields of V1 double-opponent cells in alert macaque monkeys (Conway, 2001; Conway and Livingstone, 2006). To model the responses of a neuron population tiling a portion of the visual field, each measured receptive field was spatially convolved with natural images both before and after a simulated change in lighting conditions (modeled by a von Kries transformation). Natural images were taken from Olmos and Kingdom (2004). We show that, due to their double-opponent structure, both the physiologically characterized and model V1 cells show stronger color constancy in response to natural images than the model LGN neurons. We quantify the improvement across a range of different recorded cells and natural images. We further quantify the effects of receptive-field shape and cone-type balance upon the color constancy of V1 double-opponent cells by comparing the recorded V1 cells to model V1 cells with different surround shapes and balances of L, M, and S cone contributions. Finally, we consider the effect of contrast normalization by the responses of neighboring neurons and generate experimental predictions for the influence of contrast normalization on color constancy.
Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the Whitehall Foundation (BC); and the Sloan Foundation, UC Davis, and a UC Davis Ophthalmology Research to Prevent Blindness grant (MG,DF).
References
1. Conway BR (2001). Journal of Neuroscience 21(8):2768-2783.
2. Conway BR and Livingstone MS (2006). Journal of Neuroscience 26(42):10826-10846.
3. Olmos A and Kingdom F (2004) McGill Calibrated Color Image Database http://tabby.vision.mcgill.ca .
Conference:
Computational and systems
neuroscience 2009, Salt Lake City, UT, United States, 26 Feb - 3 Mar, 2009.
Presentation Type:
Poster Presentation
Topic:
Poster Presentations
Citation:
(2009). Color Constancy of V1 Double Opponent Cells to Natural Images.
Front. Syst. Neurosci.
Conference Abstract:
Computational and systems
neuroscience 2009.
doi: 10.3389/conf.neuro.06.2009.03.146
Copyright:
The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers.
They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.
The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.
Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.
For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.
Received:
02 Feb 2009;
Published Online:
02 Feb 2009.