Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Linton, Paul
Format: Preprint
Published: 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19740
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866913564648800256
author Linton, Paul
author_facet Linton, Paul
contents In (Linton, 2024) I present a new illusion (the 'Linton Stereo Illusion') that challenges our understanding of stereo vision. A vision scientist has shared their own analysis of the 'Linton Stereo Illusion' (titled: 'There is no challenge to our understanding of stereo vision: Response to Linton and Kriegeskorte (ECVP 2024 and ArXiv:2408.00770)') claiming that the 'Linton Stereo Illusion' is fully explained by Johnston (1991). I regard Johnston (1991) as one of the most important stereo vision papers in our young (< 200-year-old) field, and so this challenge requires a response. In this paper I explain why Johnston (1991) cannot explain the 'Linton Stereo Illusion'. Indeed, Johnston (1991) makes predictions that are the exact opposite of those observed in the 'Linton Stereo Illusion'. I also highlight a key concern with Johnston (1991)'s account that has so far been overlooked. Johnston (1991)'s account predicts that vergence eye movements will cause massive stereo distortions, leading to a world of unstable stereo perception. But this simply does not reflect our visual experience.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2410_19740
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Linton Stereo Illusion: Response on Johnston (1991)
Linton, Paul
Neurons and Cognition
In (Linton, 2024) I present a new illusion (the 'Linton Stereo Illusion') that challenges our understanding of stereo vision. A vision scientist has shared their own analysis of the 'Linton Stereo Illusion' (titled: 'There is no challenge to our understanding of stereo vision: Response to Linton and Kriegeskorte (ECVP 2024 and ArXiv:2408.00770)') claiming that the 'Linton Stereo Illusion' is fully explained by Johnston (1991). I regard Johnston (1991) as one of the most important stereo vision papers in our young (< 200-year-old) field, and so this challenge requires a response. In this paper I explain why Johnston (1991) cannot explain the 'Linton Stereo Illusion'. Indeed, Johnston (1991) makes predictions that are the exact opposite of those observed in the 'Linton Stereo Illusion'. I also highlight a key concern with Johnston (1991)'s account that has so far been overlooked. Johnston (1991)'s account predicts that vergence eye movements will cause massive stereo distortions, leading to a world of unstable stereo perception. But this simply does not reflect our visual experience.
title Linton Stereo Illusion: Response on Johnston (1991)
topic Neurons and Cognition
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19740