Back

Assessing Perceptual Chromatic Equiluminance Using a Reflexive Pupillary Response

Ye, L.; Mahony, B. W.; Wang, X.; Daye, P.; Wang, W.; Cavanagh, P.; Pouget, P.; Andolina, I. M.

2023-12-12 neuroscience
10.1101/2023.10.19.563116 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Equiluminant stimuli help assess the integrity of colour perception and the relationship of colour to other visual features. As a result of individual variation, it is necessary to calibrate experimental visual stimuli to suit each individuals unique equiluminant ratio. Most traditional methods rely on training observers to report their subjective equiluminance point. Such paradigms cannot easily be implemented on pre-verbal or non-verbal observers. Here, we present a novel Pupil Frequency-Tagging Method (PFTM) for detecting a participants unique equiluminance point without verbal instruction and with minimal training. PFTM analyses reflexive pupil oscillations induced by slow (< 2 Hz) temporal alternations between coloured stimuli. Two equiluminant stimuli will induce a similar pupil dilation response regardless of colour; therefore, an observers equiluminant point can be identified as the luminance ratio between two colours for which the oscillatory amplitude of the pupil at the tagged frequency is minimal. We compared pupillometry-based equiluminance ratios to those obtained with two established techniques in humans: minimum flicker and minimum motion. In addition, we estimated the equiluminance point in non-human primates, demonstrating that this new technique can be successfully employed in non-verbal subjects. Key PointsO_LIMeasuring equiluminance is challenging in non-verbal subjects. C_LIO_LIThe pupil diameter varies as perceived brightness changes. C_LIO_LIUtilising oscillatory pupillometry, PFTM provides a way to measure equiluminance points without training or the need for a subjective report. C_LI

Published in Scientific Reports (predicted rank #2) · training set

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.