An Astable Multivibrator Model of Binocular Rivalry

Lehky, Sidney R.

doi:10.1068/p170215

Cited by 242 publications

(234 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

223

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The subtractive suppression (−w o O r in Eq. 1) was analogous to mutual inhibition in previous models (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8). However, previous models exhibited response alternations (in a magnitude similar to the response alternations for rivalry stimuli) for stationary, monocular-plaid stimuli ( Noise.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…In conventional models of binocular rivalry, the competition between two percepts has been characterized as mutual inhibition between two populations of neurons selective for each of the two stimuli (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11). Notwithstanding the differences in their details, these models consider the neural processing underlying binocular rivalry to be an automatic process.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Attention model of binocular rivalry

Rankin

Rinzel

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When the corresponding retinal locations in the two eyes are presented with incompatible images, a stable percept gives way to perceptual alternations in which the two images compete for perceptual dominance. As perceptual experience evolves dynamically under constant external inputs, binocular rivalry has been used for studying intrinsic cortical computations and for understanding how the brain regulates competing inputs. Converging behavioral and EEG results have shown that binocular rivalry and attention are intertwined: binocular rivalry ceases when attention is diverted away from the rivalry stimuli. In addition, the competing image in one eye suppresses the target in the other eye through a pattern of gain changes similar to those induced by attention. These results require a revision of the current computational theories of binocular rivalry, in which the role of attention is ignored. Here, we provide a computational model of binocular rivalry. In the model, competition between two images in rivalry is driven by both attentional modulation and mutual inhibition, which have distinct selectivity (feature vs. eye of origin) and dynamics (relatively slow vs. relatively fast). The proposed model explains a wide range of phenomena reported in rivalry, including the three hallmarks: (i) binocular rivalry requires attention; (ii) various perceptual states emerge when the two images are swapped between the eyes multiple times per second; (iii) the dominance duration as a function of input strength follows Levelt's propositions. With a bifurcation analysis, we identified the parameter space in which the model's behavior was consistent with experimental results.B inocular rivalry is a visual phenomenon in which perception alternates between incompatible monocular images presented to the two eyes. During binocular rivalry, perceptual experience evolves dynamically while the external inputs are held constant. Binocular rivalry thereby provides an opportunity to gain insights about the intrinsic cortical computations underlying visual perception (1, 2).In conventional models of binocular rivalry, the competition between two percepts has been characterized as mutual inhibition between two populations of neurons selective for each of the two stimuli (3-11). Notwithstanding the differences in their details, these models consider the neural processing underlying binocular rivalry to be an automatic process. These models predict, therefore, that the dynamics of binocular rivalry are influenced mainly by bottom-up sensory inputs.Converging experimental evidence has shown, however, that binocular rivalry also depends on attention (for a review, see ref.12). First, EEG has been used to measure a neural correlate of the perceptual alternations during binocular rivalry when observers pay attention to the rival stimuli (13). However, this rivalry-induced modulation of the EEG signal is largely or entirely eliminated when attention is diverted away from the stimuli (14). Second, behavioral experiments comparing the perceptual cons...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention model of binocular rivalry

Rankin

Rinzel

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Binocular rivalry provides a unique window into neural dynamics. Indeed, a number of dynamic systems models have been proposed to explain the alternating periods of perceptual dominance for rival stimulation, including the periods of mixed percepts and travelling waves of changing dominance [31,[88][89][90][91][92]. There is increasing evidence that the brain relies on a set of canonical neural computations, repeating them across brain regions and modalities to apply similar operations to different problems [93].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can binocular rivalry reveal neural correlates of consciousness?

Blake

Brascamp

Heeger

2014

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay critically examines the extent to which binocular rivalry can provide important clues about the neural correlates of conscious visual perception. Our ideas are presented within the framework of four questions about the use of rivalry for this purpose: (i) what constitutes an adequate comparison condition for gauging rivalry's impact on awareness, (ii) how can one distinguish abolished awareness from inattention, (iii) when one obtains unequivocal evidence for a causal link between a fluctuating measure of neural activity and fluctuating perceptual states during rivalry, will it generalize to other stimulus conditions and perceptual phenomena and (iv) does such evidence necessarily indicate that this neural activity constitutes a neural correlate of consciousness? While arriving at sceptical answers to these four questions, the essay nonetheless offers some ideas about how a more nuanced utilization of binocular rivalry may still provide fundamental insights about neural dynamics, and glimpses of at least some of the ingredients comprising neural correlates of consciousness, including those involved in perceptual decision-making.

show abstract

“…A number of formal models have been developed which are able to reproduce aspects of binocular rivalry (Dayan, 1998;Grossberg & Mingolla, 1985;Kalarickal, 2000;Kawamoto & Anderson, 1985;Koene, 2006;Laing & Chow, 2002;Lehky, 1988;Lumer, 1998;Matsuoka, 1984;Noest et al, 2007;Wilson, 2003;Wilson, 2007;Zhou, Gao, White, Merk, & Yao, 2004). The majority of these models analyse binocular rivalry a priori as a phenomenon driven by adaptation of the winning neural population, and lateral and/or top down inhibition of the competing population.…”

Section: Recent Models Of Binocular Rivalrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive coding explains binocular rivalry: An epistemological review

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBinocular rivalry occurs when the eyes are presented with different stimuli and subjective perception alternates between them. Though recent years have seen a number of models of this phenomenon, the mechanisms behind binocular rivalry are still debated and we still lack a principled understanding of why a cognitive system such as the brain should exhibit this striking kind of behaviour. Furthermore, psychophysical and neurophysiological (single cell and imaging) studies of rivalry are not unequivocal and have proven difficult to reconcile within one framework. This review takes an epistemological approach to rivalry that considers the brain as engaged in probabilistic unconscious perceptual inference about the causes of its sensory input. We describe a simple empirical Bayesian framework, implemented with predictive coding, which seems capable of explaining binocular rivalry and reconciling many findings. The core of the explanation is that selection of one stimulus, and subsequent alternation between stimuli in rivalry occur when: (i) there is no single model or hypothesis about the causes in the environment that enjoys both high likelihood and high prior probability and (ii) when one stimulus dominates, the bottom-up, driving signal for that stimulus is explained away while, crucially, the bottom-up signal for the suppressed stimulus is not, and remains as an unexplained but explainable prediction error signal. This induces instability in perceptual dynamics that can give rise to perceptual transitions or alternations during rivalry.

show abstract

An Astable Multivibrator Model of Binocular Rivalry

Cited by 242 publications

References 34 publications

Attention model of binocular rivalry

Attention model of binocular rivalry

Can binocular rivalry reveal neural correlates of consciousness?

Predictive coding explains binocular rivalry: An epistemological review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About