Two models of the recognition and detection of texture-defined letters compared

We quantified texture segregation by measuring psychophysically the percentage correct detection scores for each of a set of 10 texture-defined (TD) letters using the temporal two-alternative forced choice method, and at the same time quantified spatial discrimination of the TD form of measuring psychophysically the percentage correct letter recognition scores for the 10 letters. Ten levels of task difficulty were created by adding noise dots to the texture patterns. The resulting psychophysical data were used to test and compare models of the detection and recognition of texture-defined letters. Each model comprised a sequence of physiologically plausible stages in early visual processing. Each had the same first, second and third stages, namely linear orientation-tuned spatial filters followed by rectification and smoothing. Model 1 had only one non-linear stage. Model 2 had two non-linear stages. In model 2 the second non-linear stage was cross-orientation inhibition. This second non-linear stage enhanced the texture borders by, in effect, comparing textures at different locations in the texture pattern. In both models, the last stage modelled either letter detection or letter recognition. Letter recognition was modelled as follows. We passed a given letter stimulus through the first several stages of a model and, in 10 separate calculations, cross-correlated the output with a template of each of the 10 letters. From these 10 correlations we obtained a predicted percentage correct letter recognition score for the given letter stimulus. The predicted recognition scores closely agreed with the experimental data at all 10 levels of task difficulty for model 2, but not for model 1. We conclude that a borderenhancing algorithm is necessary to model letter recognition. The letter-detection algorithm modelled detection of part of a letter (a single letter stroke) in terms of the signal-to-noise ratio of a letter-segment detector. The predicted letter detection scores fitted the data closely for both models.