VSS2014 Note

• Kay et al. proposed a scheme to model fMRI BOLD response. He model includes a pRF, followed by contrast normalization and second order summation. This model can fit V1-V3 BOLD activation.

Many experiments in my lab should be able to use this model. Also, once we know the pRF, we can construct our own BOLD activation model.

• Freeman et al. used designer stimuli to explore the BOLD activation in the ventral stream. He used a lot stimuli to probe brain activation in many, many areas. Then, used simocelli's synthetic texture method to model the stimulus optimal for a brain region. Then, use that stimuli to explore the function of the target brain area.
• 24.25 Webster and Fine used a data driven approach to explore the brain function. They basically just use a huge bank of stimulus. Then get a correlation between voxels.  They then arrange the correlation matrix to find clusters of voxels with high correlations and define that as an ROI. This provides a way to detect brain regions without making assumption about the function of a particular area in advance.
•  26.11 - 26.14 many authors reported that grouping flankers with other stimuli reduces crowding effect.
• 26.16 BOLD response to target with iso-orientation collinear flankers is contrast dependent but not orthogonal flankers. This study is almost identical to mine submitted earlier this year.
• 26.573 Palmer believed the 1/3 rule of composition, or that the object should put at 1/3 position of the display for the best aesthetic value is not the whole story. This rule changes with other picture properties, such as inward bias or the position of background objects.
• 32.13 Yuvol-Greenberg & Heeger studied continuous flash suppression on the BOLD activation in early visual cortex. Their stimuli has the mask either at the same eye or different eye as the target and varied target contrast. They showed that the mask changes the gain to the target and suggested that the CFS may be just a kind of monocular noise masking.
• 32.14 Metzger used ERP to study the brain activation of a probe in the suppressed eye in binocular rivalry. They showed that the suppressed or unsuppressed probe had the same waveform in early ERP waveforms and only differed after 300ms later than probe onset. Hence, they conclude that the response to probe in binocular rivalry is due to top-down attentional process.
• 61.14 Marlow  et al. from Anderson's lab reported that not only the depth percept and  lighting condition perceived from a sinewave grating can be influenced by the shape of its contour, but also the perceived material (matt or metallic) can be affected by the contour if the grating has more black than white.
•