JN Journal of Neurophysiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (September 7, 2005). doi:10.1152/jn.00557.2005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
94/6/4412    most recent
00557.2005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Freeman, A. W
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Freeman, A. W
Submitted on May 27, 2005
Accepted on September 4, 2005

A multi-stage model for binocular rivalry

Alan W Freeman*

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: A.Freeman{at}fhs.usyd.edu.au.

Binocular rivalry is the alternating perception that occurs when incompatible stimuli are presented to the two eyes: one monocular stimulus dominates vision and then the other stimulus dominates, with a perceptual switch occurring every few seconds. There is a need for a binocular rivalry model that accounts for both well-established results on the timing of dominance intervals, and for more recent evidence on the distributed neural processing of rivalry. The model for binocular rivalry developed here consists of four parallel visual channels, two driven by the left eye, and two by the right. Each channel consists of several consecutive processing stages representing successively higher cortical levels, with mutual inhibition between the channels at each stage. All stages are architecturally identical. With n the number of stages, the model is implemented as 4n nonlinear differential equations using a total of eight parameters. Despite the simplicity of its architecture, the model accounts for a variety of experimental observations: 1. the increasing depth of rivalry at higher cortical areas, as shown in electrophysiological, imaging, and psychophysical experiments; 2. the unimodal probability density of dominance durations, where the mode is less than the mean; 3. the lack of correlation between successive dominance durations; 4. the effect of interocular stimulus differences on dominance duration; 5. eye suppression, as opposed to feature suppression. The model is potentially applicable to issues of visual processing more general than binocular rivalry.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Atten Percept PsychophysHome page
K. Ozkan and M. L. Braunstein
Predominance of ground over ceiling surfaces in binocular rivalry
Atten Percept Psychophys, August 1, 2009; 71(6): 1305 - 1312.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Atten Percept PsychophysHome page
A. W. Freeman and D. F. Li
Conditions required for binocular rivalry suppression
Atten Percept Psychophys, January 1, 2009; 71(1): 174 - 182.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
R. Moreno-Bote, J. Rinzel, and N. Rubin
Noise-Induced Alternations in an Attractor Network Model of Perceptual Bistability
J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2007; 98(3): 1125 - 1139.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
A. Shpiro, R. Curtu, J. Rinzel, and N. Rubin
Dynamical Characteristics Common to Neuronal Competition Models
J Neurophysiol, January 1, 2007; 97(1): 462 - 473.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2005 by the The American Physiological Society.