The interplay between detection and localization in human vision
- 1University of Oxford
Abstract
Detection and localization are fundamental but distinct tasks of sensory systems: detecting a signal requires accumulating evidence for its presence, whereas localizing it requires extracting spatial information. How active sampling should be organized when both tasks must be performed simultaneously remains unclear. Here, using an analytically tractable model of early visual processing and Bayesian ideal-observer inference, we establish a direct relation between the two tasks: localizing a stimulus is equivalent to detecting its spatial gradient. Consequently, detection and localization favor fundamentally different sampling dynamics when the stimulus size exceeds the effective blur scale of the visual system. Applied to fixational eye movements (FEMs), which continually translate stationary visual stimuli across the adapting retina, this distinction yields two competing optimal movement scales. Localization is optimized when the eye moves approximately one retinal blur length during the adaptation time, whereas detection is optimized by motion on the scale of the stimulus size. The scale of physiological FEMs lies near the predicted localization optimum, while stimulus detection remains comparatively robust to variations in eye motion. Our model recovers established laws of temporal and spatial summation while predicting additional scaling regimes arising from FEMs. We propose an experimental paradigm that tests these predictions by measuring localization at matched detectability, eliminating the unknown internal-noise amplitude. Our results reveal a fundamental trade-off between acquiring evidence for the presence and position of spatially extended signals and suggest that human fixational eye movements preferentially support spatial localization.
Related
- A machine-vision framework for electric vehicle charging hole localization based on contour-driven detection and geometric verification
- Vision In SyndrOmic Neurodevelopmental disorders-15q (VISiON-15q) study: eye tracking to supplement clinical examination for detection of cerebral/cortical visual impairment in children with Angelman and Duplication of 15q Syndromes
- A Vision-Language Model as a Teacher for Bird Vocalization Detection
- Hybrid local–global vision transformer framework for robust plant disease detection in precision agriculture
- What we can learn from nature to restore human vision
BibTeX
@misc{coupette2026interplay,
title = {{The interplay between detection and localization in human vision}},
author = {F. Coupette and D. H. Brainard and H. E. Smithson and D. J. Read},
howpublished = {bioRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = jul,
doi = {10.64898/2026.07.06.736811},
url = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.06.736811v2},
note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - The interplay between detection and localization in human vision
AU - F. Coupette
AU - D. H. Brainard
AU - H. E. Smithson
AU - D. J. Read
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/07/06
PB - bioRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.07.06.736811
UR - https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.06.736811v2
AB - Detection and localization are fundamental but distinct tasks of sensory systems: detecting a signal requires accumulating evidence for its presence, whereas localizing it requires extracting spatial information. How active sampling should be organized when both tasks must be performed simultaneously remains unclear. Here, using an analytically tractable model of early visual processing and Bayesian ideal-observer inference, we establish a direct relation between the two tasks: localizing a stimulus is equivalent to detecting its spatial gradient. Consequently, detection and localization favor fundamentally different sampling dynamics when the stimulus size exceeds the effective blur scale of the visual system. Applied to fixational eye movements (FEMs), which continually translate stationary visual stimuli across the adapting retina, this distinction yields two competing optimal movement scales. Localization is optimized when the eye moves approximately one retinal blur length during the adaptation time, whereas detection is optimized by motion on the scale of the stimulus size. The scale of physiological FEMs lies near the predicted localization optimum, while stimulus detection remains comparatively robust to variations in eye motion. Our model recovers established laws of temporal and spatial summation while predicting additional scaling regimes arising from FEMs. We propose an experimental paradigm that tests these predictions by measuring localization at matched detectability, eliminating the unknown internal-noise amplitude. Our results reveal a fundamental trade-off between acquiring evidence for the presence and position of spatially extended signals and suggest that human fixational eye movements preferentially support spatial localization.
ER -