Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We have measured observer performance in identifying gratings that were sampled by degenerate-sampling arrays. Grating identification for high-spatial-frequency stimuli fell to threshold levels only after more than 88% of the sampling elements were subtracted. Although several studies with normal observers have shown that foveal visual acuity corresponds to estimates of interphotoreceptor spacing derived from anatomical photoreceptor density, a simple transformation of sampling-element density to mean spacing does not describe the results in our simulation of degenerate-sampling arrays. To the extent that our model simulates the anatomical changes of retinal pathology, our results suggest that grating acuity reflects the normal high-spatial-sampling rate of small regions of preserved anatomy in the degenerate retina rather than the mean density or spacing of foveal receptors after massive degeneration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geller et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: