CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 108Visual perception and processing mechanismsFace Recognition and PerceptionNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Analysis of the Context Integration Mechanisms Underlying Figure–Ground Organization in the Visual Cortex

Open access
Zhang, Nan R., von der Heydt, Rüdiger·2010·The Journal of Neuroscience
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.5168-09.2010PMC PMC2910339
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Most neurons in visual cortex respond to contrast borders and are orientation selective, and some are also selective for which side of a border is figure and which side is ground (“border ownership coding”). These neurons are influenced by the image context far beyond the classical receptive field (CRF) and as early as 25 ms after the onset of activity in the cortex. The nature of the fast context integration mechanism is not well understood. What parts of a figure contribute to the context effect? What is the structure of the “extraclassical surround”? Is the context information propagated through horizontal fibers within cortex or through reciprocal connections via higher-level areas? To address these questions, we studied border ownership modulation with fragmented figures. Neurons were recorded in areas V1 and V2 of Macaca mulatta under behaviorally induced fixation. Test figures were fragmented rectangles. While one edge was centered on the CRF, the presence of the fragments outside the CRF was varied. The surround fragments produced facilitation on the preferred border ownership side as well as suppression on the nonpreferred side, with ∼80% of the locations contributing on average. Fragments far from the CRF influenced the responses even in the absence of fragments closer to the CRF, and without the extra delay that would incur from propagation through horizontal fibers. Three principally different models are discussed. The results support a model in which the antagonistic surround influences are produced by reentrant signals from a higher-level area.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.5168-09.2010

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • It is not sufficient to demonstrate that descending connections to early areas introduce contextual modulations that are essential for perception because this is accommodated by traditional models of visual processing.

    “It is not sufficient to demonstrate that descending connections to early areas introduce contextual modulations that are essential for perception because this is accommodated by traditional models of visual processing (e.g., Ref. 131).”

    From Evaluating the neurophysiological evidence for predictive processing as a model of perception (2020) · cites this paper as [131]

    The Results section (Spatial aspects of context integration; page unavailable) says that feedback from higher-level areas can mediate contextual modulation and that models of border-ownership selectivity include such feedback loops. This supports the paper as an example of a model accommodating descending contextual influences. It does not establish that those influences are essential for perception or characterize the models as traditional models of visual processing. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kikuchi M Fukushima K Assignment of figural side to contours based on symmetry, parallelism, and convexity Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems, Pt 2, Proceedings 2003 2774 123 130

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Zhang, N. R., & von der Heydt, R.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Publisher
Society for Neuroscience
Published
2010-05-12
Volume
30
Issue
19
Pages
6482-6496
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
DOI
10.1523/jneurosci.5168-09.2010
PMC
PMC2910339
OpenAlex
W2050473619
Cited by
108
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 10
FWCI
7.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ey016281-08, EY016281)
  • National Eye Institute (EY02966., EY 016281, R01-EY016281, R01EY002966)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
figure-ground organization, contextual integration, orientation selectivity, visual cortex, area V1, V2, horizontal connections, macaque
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Algorithms, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Macaca mulatta, Male, Microelectrodes, Models, Neurological, Neurons, Photic Stimulation, Time Factors, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception

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