Impaired selection of a previously ignored singleton: Evidence for salience map plastic changes

Spatial suppression of a salient colour distractor is achievable via statistical learning. Distractor suppression attenuates unwanted capture, but at the same time target selection at the most likely distractor location is impaired. This result corroborates the idea that the distractor salience is attenuated via inhibitory signals applied to the corresponding location in the priority map. What is less clear, however, is whether lingering impairment in target selection when the distractor is removed are due to the proactive strategic maintenance of the suppressive signal at the previous most likely distractor location or result from the fact that suppression has induced plastic changes in the priority map, probably changing input weights. Here, we provide evidence that supports the latter possibility, as we found that impairment in target selection persisted even when the singleton distractor in the training phase became the target of search in a subsequent test phase. This manipulation rules out the possibility that the observed impairments at the previous most likely distractor location were caused by a signal suppression maintained at this location. Rather, the results reveal that the inhibitory signals cause long-lasting changes in the priority map, which affect future computation of the target salience at the same location, and therefore the efficiency of attentional selection.

Attention-Generated Apparent Motion

This chapter explores attention-generated apparent motion. A flickering display can seem to appear to move in opposite directions depending on which feature the observer attends to in the display. The illusory motion, generated by attention, demonstrates the mechanism of the third-order motion system: a dynamic salience map of the locations of the most salient stimulus features is determined jointly by stimulus strength (bottom-up) and by selective attention (top-down). Motion is computed directly and automatically from the salience map. Concepts covered in this chapter include apparent motion, first-order motion and second-order motion, feature tracking, salience maps, bottom-up processing, and top-down processing.

Obstacles Regions 3D-Perception Method for Mobile Robots Based on Visual Saliency

A novel mobile robots 3D-perception obstacle regions method in indoor environment based on Improved Salient Region Extraction (ISRE) is proposed. This model acquires the original image by the Kinect sensor and then gains Original Salience Map (OSM) and Intensity Feature Map (IFM) from the original image by the salience filtering algorithm. The IFM was used as the input neutron of PCNN. In order to make the ignition range more exact, PCNN ignition pulse input was further improved as follows: point multiplication algorithm was taken between PCNN internal neuron and binarization salience image of OSM; then we determined the final ignition pulse input. The salience binarization region abstraction was fulfilled by improved PCNN multiple iterations finally. Finally, the binarization area was mapped to the depth map obtained by Kinect sensor, and mobile robot can achieve the obstacle localization function. The method was conducted on a mobile robot (Pioneer3-DX). The experimental results demonstrated the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.

The inter-trial spatial biases of stimuli and goals in saccadic programming

Prior studies have shown an ‘alternate antisaccade-goal bias’, in that the saccadic landing points of antisaccades were displaced towards the location of antisaccade goals used in other trials in the same experimental block. Thus the motor response in one trial induced a spatial bias of a motor response in another trial. In this study we investigated whether sensory information, i.e. the location of a visual stimulus, might have a spatial effect on a motor response too. Such an effect might be attractive as for the alternate antisaccade-goal bias or repulsive. For this purpose we used block of trials with either antisaccades, prosaccades or mixed trials in order to study the alternate-trial biases generated by antisaccade goals, antisaccade stimuli, and prosaccade goals. in contrast to the effects of alternate antisaccade goals described in prior studies, alternate antisaccade stimuli generated a significant repulsive bias of about 1.8°: furthermore, if stimulus and motor goal coincide, as with an alternate prosaccade, the repulsive effect of a stimulus prevails, causing a bias of about 0.9°. Taken together with prior results, these findings may reflect averaging of current and alternate trial activity in a salience map, with excitatory activity from the motor response and inhibitory activity from the sensory input..