The Contrast Sensitivity Function (CSF) USD Internet Sensation & Perception Laboratory

Introduction The spatial resolution of the visual system is usually assessed using a simple measure of static visual acuity. A typical visual acuity test consists of a number of high contrast, black-on-white targets of progressively smaller size. The smallest target that one can successfully read denotes one's visual acuity. For example, if the smallest letters that you can read upon a Snellen Eye Chart subtend 5 minutes of arc (minarc) in height, you are said to have 20/20 (or "normal") acuity. That is, the smallest letter that your visual system can successfully resolve is 5 minarc in height. Visual acuity is a common measure of visual status because: (1) it is easy to measure and (2) small amounts of refractive error in the eye yield marked declines in acuity test performance. Fortunately, most sources of refractive error are correctable via glasses or contact lenses. However, recent findings have demonstrated that visual spatial processing is organized as a series of parallel - but independent - channels in the nervous system; each "tuned" to targets of a different size. As a result of this parallel organization of the visual nervous system, visual acuity measurements no longer appear to adequately describe the spatial visual abilities of a given individual. Modern vision research has clearly demonstrated that the capacity to detect and identify spatial form varies widely as a function of target size, contrast, and spatial orientation (see Braddick, Campbell & Atkinson, 1978 or Olzak & Thomas, 1985). As a consequence of the above, a simple assessment of visual acuity often does not predict an individual's ability to detect objects of larger size (Ginsburg, Evans, Sekuler & Harp, 1982; Watson, Barlow & Robson, 1983). Contrast sensitivity testing complements and extends the assessment of visual function provided by simple acuity tests. At the cost of more complex and time-consuming procedures, contrast sensitivity measurements yield information about an individual's ability to see low-contrast targets over an extended range of target size (and orientation).

Contrast sensitivity tests use sine-wave gratings as targets instead of the letter optotypes typically used in a tests of acuity. Sine-wave gratings possess useful mathematical properties and researchers have discovered that early stages of visual processing are optimally "tuned" to such targets (Maffei, 1978; Watson, et al., 1983). A contrast sensitivity assessment procedure consists of presenting the observer with a sine-wave grating target of a given spatial frequency (i.e., the number of sinusoidal luminance cycles per degree of visual angle). The contrast of the target grating is then varied while the observer's contrast detection threshold is determined. Typically, contrast

thresholds of this sort are collected using vertically oriented sine-wave gratings varying in spatial frequency from 0.5 (very wide) to 32 (very narrow) cycles per degree of visual angle. Exploratory Demonstration Try Varying the Spatial Frequency (cycles per stimulus) and Contrast of the Sample Sine-Wave Grating Presented Below Contrast Sensitivity and the Contrast Sensitivity Function Because high levels of visual sensitivity for spatial form are associated with low contrast thresholds, a reciprocal measure (1/threshold) termed the contrast sensitivity score is computed. The contrast sensitivity scores obtained for each of the sine-wave gratings examined are then plotted as a function of target spatial frequency yielding the contrast sensitivity function (CSF). Some typical CSF's are depicted in Figure 1 below. Note the characteristic inverted-U shape of the CSF and its logarithmic axes.

Figure 1.- Contrast sensitivity functions of seven age groups(after Schieber, 1992) Spatial Frequency Specific Adaptation of the Contrast Sensitivity Function (CSF) USD Internet Sensation & Perception Laboratory

Introduction Some typical contrast sensitivity functions (CSF's) are depicted in Figure 1. For more detailed information about the CSF consult the previous laboratory excercise.

Figure 1.-Contrast sensitivity functions of seven age groups. (after Schieber, 1992) Cummulative laboratory research has demonstrated that visual spatial processing is organized as a series of parallel but independent - channels in the nervous system; each "tuned" to targets of a different size (or "spatial frequency"). Figure 2 schematically represents how the varying sensitivities of five such independent spatial processing channels could account for the characteristic shape of the contrast sensitivity function. Each channel responds to a relatively narrow range of stimulus spatial frequency. Low (channel A) and high (channel E) spatial frequency channels have relatively poor sensitivities; while the channels tuned to intermediate spatial frequencies (channels B-D) are optimally sensitive to contrast variations over space (see Figure 2).

Figure 2.-Schematic representaion of five parallel spatial processing channels. When the different degrees of spatial processing efficiency observed across channels A through E are plotted as a line graph in Figure 3, the now familiar inverted-U shape of the contrast sensitivity function can be seen.

Figure 3.-Multiple, independent channels of varying efficiency mediate the inverted-U shape of the contrast sensitivity function. A technique called "sensory adaptation" can be used to demonstrate that the multiple spatial channels (depicted in Figures 2 and 3 above) are, indeed, parallel and independent. The logic of the adaptation technique is as follows: If an observer is shown a sine-wave grating of a specific spatial frequency for a prolonged period of time, the spatial channel (or channels) tuned to that particular stimulus spatial frequency will become fatigued - and, thus, less sensitive. However, this fatigue will NOT occur in channels tuned to other spatial frequencies. Figure 4 depicts the change in the relative sensitivities of the underlying channels that mediate the contrast sensitivity function following prolonged adaptation to a sine-wave grating with a spatial frequency centered in the range processed by channel C (see Figure 4). Note that the "fatigued" channel C has lost much of its efficiency whereas the surrounding channels - which are not tuned to the spatial frequency of the adaptation grating - remain relatively unaffected.

Figure 4.- Spatial frequency specific "fatigue" of the channels mediating the contrast sensitivity function. (Compare to "preadapted" state in Figure 3 above) When the relative sensitivities of our schematic spatial channels are linked together in a line graph as in Figure 5, a "notch" in the resulting contrast sensitivity function should be observed (see Figure 5). Indeed, such a "notch" in the CSF has been found to occur following prolonged adaptation to a sine-wave grating of fixed spatial frequency. The width of the "notch" - relative to the spatial frequency of the adaptation stimulus - is used to (1) demonstrate the existence of parallel, independent streams of visual processing as well as to (2) estimate the "bandwidth" in the spatial tuning of those same channels.

Figure 5.- Post-adaptation "notch" in the CSF occurs at the same spatial frequency as the adaptation stimulus. References Braddick, O., Campbell, F.W. & Atkinson, J. (1978). Channels in vision: Basic aspects. In R.Held, H.W. Leibowitz & H. Teuber (Eds.) Perception. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. pp. 3-38. Ginsburg, A.P., Evans, D. Sekuler, R. & Harp, S. (1982). Contrast sensitivity predicts pilot's performance in aircraft simulators. American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics, 59, 105-109. Maffei, L. (1978). Spatial frequency channels: Neural mechanisms. In R.Held, H.W. Leibowitz & H. Teuber (Eds.) Perception. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. pp. 39-66. Olzak, L.A. & Thomaas, J.P. (1985). Seeing spatial patterns. In K. Boff, et al. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance. New York: Wiley. pp. 7:1-7:56. Schieber, F. (1992). Aging and the senses. In J.E. Birren, R.Sloan & G. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of mental health and aging. New York: Academic Press. pp. 251-306. Watson, A.B., BArlow, H.B. & Robson, J.G. (1983). What does the eye see best? Nature, 302, 419-422.

End of The Contrast Sensitivity Function.

Contrast Sensitivity Function

The contrast sensitivity function described in the Human vision section is given for frequencies in cycles/degree. As we want to compute our metric in image space, frequencies should be converted from cycles/degree to pixels/degree. This conversion is simple and follows straight forward from the viewing geometry for a given viewing distance. Actually the whole metric is viewing distance dependent. (The other above mentioned metrics are also viewing distance dependent, although it is not explicitly mentioned in the above papers). Consider, once more, our picture with the black and white stripes. Let the stripes be 1 cm wide now. You will agree, the stripes will be clearly and sharply distinguishable if the image is observed from 50 cm. But what happens if the viewing distance is, let's say, 100 meters. The image becomes gray again. Let us derive the cycles/degree to pixels/degree conversion now. Actually we are interested in how many pixels contains one visual degree. We will denote the viewing distance given in cm as d, the display

size in cm as W, the display resolution in pixels as R, the width of the display portion covered by 1 visual degree given in cm as w, and the number of pixels in w as r (see fig. 8.1).

Figure 8.1: Viewing geometry From simple geometry follows:

Now, according to the Shannon sampling theorem [Glas95], the maximum frequency that can be realized using r pixels is r/2 cycles. Let us illustrate this conversion using the next example: Our display device is a CRT monitor. The width of the monitor W is 34 cm. The display resolution is 1280 pixels, and the viewing distance is 50 cm. We are interested in the number of pixels r contained in one ( ) visual degree. According to (8.2) r is:

Since the maximum displayable frequency is r/2, frequencies above 16.427 cycles/degree cannot be displayed. They represent the sub-pixel range (see fig. 8.2). If we want to exploit our visual system to its maximum we should move the maximum frequency toward 60 (remember that the contrast sensitivity function is practically 0 above , see section 2.3.5 Contrast Sensitivity Function), either by increasing the viewing distance d, or resolution R (see equation 8.2). If the distance d is increased further,

such that the maximum frequency goes above 60, we are not able to see the individual pixels any more. Larger pixel areas will become the essential image elements now. Note that if the changes on the pixel basis are important we can decrease the viewing distance d in order to move the maximum frequency near the peak of the contrast sensitivity function A(f).

Figure 8.2: Subpixel range for maximum displayable frequency of 22 cycles/degre