Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T21:42:49.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Objective Investigation of Visual Function Using a Nondestructive Zoom-FFT Technique for Evoked Potential Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

M.P. Regan and
D. Regan
M.P. Regan*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, York University
D. Regan
Affiliation:
Department of Ophthalmology, University of Toronto
*
Department of Psychology BSB, York University, 4700 Keele St., North York, Ontario, Canada M3J 1P3
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

We describe an ultra-high resolution technique for recording evoked potentials (EPs) that are thousands of times smaller than the total EEG power. We report that two superimposed visual stimulus patterns, one modulated at F1 Hz and the other at F2 Hz , can generate 20 or more EP frequency components, each of which is contained within a bandwidth of no more than 0.004 Hz. We have developed a theoretical method for calculating the amplitudes and phases of these various cross-modulation components for different arrangements of model neurons. The relative amplitude of the various cross-modulation components seems to be a 'signature' of the particular neural model and this offers a way of testing theoretical neural models against EP data. As an illustration we compare the nonlinear EP components evoked by dichoptic stimulation with unpatterned flickering light against several models of binocular interaction. These nonlinear binocular interaction terms may offer a means of investigating binocularity in amblyopic children or infants who have low acuity in one or both eyes.

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , May 1989, pp. 168 - 179
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation 1989

References

REFERENCES

1.Regan, D. Evoked Potentials in Psychology, Sensory Physiology and Clinical Medicine. London: Chapman and Hall; New York; Wiley 1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Regan, D. Human Brain Electrophysiology: Evoked Potentials and Evoked Magnetic Fields in Science and Medicine, New York: Elsevier, 1989.Google Scholar
3.Dawson, GD. A summation technique for the detection of small evoked potentials. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1954; 6: 65–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Halliday, AM. (ed.). Evoked Potentials in Clinical Testing. Churchill Livingstone, London 1982.Google Scholar
5.Chiappa, KH. Evoked Potentials in Clinical Medicine. Raven, New York 1983.Google Scholar
6.Regan, D. Some characteristics of average steady-state and transient responses evoked by modulated light. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1966; 20: 238–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Regan, D, Regan, MP. Nonlinearity in human visual responses to two-dimensional patterns, and a limitation of Fourier methods. Vision Res. 1987; 27: 2181–2183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Fiorentini, A, Pirchio, M, Spinelli, D. Electrophysiological evidence for spatial frequency selective mechanisms in adults and infants. Vision Res 1983; 23: 119–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Regan, D. Spatial frequency mechanisms in human vision investi-gated by evoked potential recording. Vision Res 1983; 23: 1401–1408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Zemon, V, Ratliffe, F. Intermodulation components of the visual evoked potential: Responses to lateral and superimposed stimuli. Bio Cybernet 1984; 50: 401–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Spekreijse, H. Analysis of EEG Responses in Man (Thesis) DW Junk, The Hague 1966.Google Scholar
12.Schiller, PH. The central visual system. Vision Res. 1986; 26: 1351–1386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Barlow, HB, Levick, WR. The mechanism of directionally selective units in the rabbit’s retina. J Physiol 1965; 178: 477–504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Spekreijse, H, Oosting, H. Linearising: A method for analysing and synthesising nonlinear systems. Kybernetik 1970; 7: 22–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Spekreijse, H, Reits, D. Sequential analysis of the visual evoked potential system in man: nonlinear analysis of a sandwich system. Ann NY Acad Sci 1982; 388: 72–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Regan, MP, Regan, D. Monocular and binocular nonlinearities in flicker evoked potentials. Spekreijse and van der Tweel’s linearization revisited after 21 years. Third Internat Evoked Potential 1986; Symp., Berlin.Google Scholar
17.Regan, MP, Regan, D. A frequency domain technique for character-izing nonlinearities in biological systems. J. Theor. Biol 1988; 133: 293–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Bennett, WR. New results in the calculation of modulation products. Bell System Tech J 1933; 228–243.Google Scholar
19.Gabor, D. Theory of communication. J Inst Elect Eng (Lond) 1946; 93: 429–456.Google Scholar
20.Thrane, N. Zoom-FFT, . Bruel and Kjaer Tech Rev 1980; 1980; 2: 3–41.Google Scholar
21.Regan, D. Rapid objective refraction using evoked brain potentials. Invest Ophthalmol 1973; 12: 669–79.Google ScholarPubMed
22.Regan, D. Electrophysiological evidence for colour channels in human pattern vision. Nature 1974; 250: 437–449.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Wilson, HR. A transducer function for threshold and suprathreshold human vision. Biol Cybernetics 1980; 38: 171–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Katsumi, O, Oguchi, Y, Kawara, T, et al. Effects of stimulus contrast on binocular VEP. Jap J Ophthalmol 1984; 28: 401–408.Google Scholar
25.Uemura, Y, Katsumi, O. A new approach to the objective evaluation of binocular function. In: Reinecke, RD (ed.) Strabismus II, Grune and Stratton, New York 1984; 511–521.Google Scholar
26.Marmarelis, PZ, Marmarelis, VZ. Analysis of Physiological Systems. The White Noise Approach. Plenum Press, New York 1978.Google Scholar
27.Regan, D, Regan, MP. The transducer characteristic of hair cells in the human inner ear: a possible objective measure. Brain Res 1988; 438: 363–365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Regan, D, Spekreijse, H. Electrophysiological correlate of binocular depth perception in man. Nature 1970; 255: 92–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Julesz, B, Kropfl, W, Petrig, B. Large evoked potentials to dynamic random dot correlograms and stereograms permit quick determination of stereopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1980; 77: 2348–2351.Google Scholar
30.Norcia, AM, Sutter, EE, Tyler, CW. Electrophysiological evidence for the existence of coarse and fine disparity mechanisms in human. Vision Res 1985; 25: 1603–1611.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31.Herpers, MJ, Caberg, HB, Mol, JMF. Human cerebral potentials evoked by moving dynamic random dot stereograms. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1981; 52: 50–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32.Lehmann, D, Skrandies, W, Lindenmaier, C. Sustained cortical potentials evoked in humans by binocularly correlated, uncorre-lated and disparate dynamic random-dot stimuli. Neurosci Lett 1978; 10: 129–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33.Spekreijse, H, van der Tweel, LH, Regan, D. Interocular sustained suppression: correlations with evoked potential amplitude and distribution. Vision Res 1972; 12: 521–526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed