The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Camouflage and visual perception
Open accessAbstract
How does an animal conceal itself from visual detection by other animals? This review paper seeks to identify general principles that may apply in this broad area. It considers mechanisms of visual encoding, of grouping and object encoding, and of search. In most cases, the evidence base comes from studies of humans or species whose vision approximates to that of humans. The effort is hampered by a relatively sparse literature on visual function in natural environments and with complex foraging tasks. However, some general constraints emerge as being potentially powerful principles in understanding concealment—a ‘constraint’ here means a set of simplifying assumptions. Strategies that disrupt the unambiguous encoding of discontinuities of intensity (edges), and of other key visual attributes, such as motion, are key here. Similar strategies may also defeat grouping and object-encoding mechanisms. Finally, the paper considers how we may understand the processes of search for complex targets in complex scenes. The aim is to provide a number of pointers towards issues, which may be of assistance in understanding camouflage and concealment, particularly with reference to how visual systems can detect the shape of complex, concealed objects.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Computational Approach to Edge Detection
Canny, J. (1986) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.1986.4767851 · Cited by 30,004
Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex
Hubel, D. H., & Wiesel, T. N. (1962) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1962.sp006837 · Cited by 13,680
Marr, D., & Hildreth, E. (1980) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1980.0020 · Cited by 6,510
Jones, J. P., & Palmer, L. A. (1987) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1987.58.6.1233 · Cited by 1,658 · cited 1×
“Moreover, edge detectors do not only detect features such as edges or line segments; they will respond to any feature that has any similarity to an edge, provided that the feature is intense enough (Maffei & Fiorentini 1973; Movshon et al. 1978; Jones & Palmer 1987; Smyth et al. 2003).”
Why visual attention and awareness are different
Lamme, V. A. F. (2003) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(02)00013-x · Cited by 1,172
STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF VISUAL AREA MT
Born, R. T., & Bradley, D. C. (2005) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.26.041002.131052 · Cited by 1,023 · cited 1×
“MT neurons appear to integrate inputs of motion sensitive cells from primary visual cortex and have receptive field sizes that are approximately an order of magnitude larger (Born & Bradley 2005).”
The neurophysiology of figure-ground segregation in primary visual cortex
Lamme, V. (1995) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.15-02-01605.1995 · Cited by 946
Spatial summation in the receptive fields of simple cells in the cat's striate cortex.
Movshon, J. A., Thompson, I. D., & Tolhurst, D. J. (1978) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1978.sp012488 · Cited by 890
Self-citationThompson, D. W. (1992) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781107325852 · Cited by 443
Cited by
Imperfect transparency and camouflage in glass frogs
Barnett, J. B., Michalis, C., Anderson, H. M., McEwen, B. L., Yeager, J., Pruitt, J. N., Scott-Samuel, N. E., & Cuthill, I. C. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1919417117 · Cited by 37
Dissegna, A., & Chiandetti, C. (2025) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.249626 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Troscianko, T., Benton, C. P., Lovell, P. G., Tolhurst, D. J., & Pizlo, Z.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2008-11-06
- Volume
- 364
- Issue
- 1516
- Pages
- 449-461
- ISSN
- 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2970
- OpenAlex
- W2099342763
- Cited by
- 236
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 4.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
