Table 1.
Demographic and optometric summary of the cohorts for Study 1.
Fig 1.
FInD Depth charts for A) Ring and B) Dip stimuli. Participants clicked the cells where they perceive targets in depth (i.e., in front (Ring) or behind (Dip) relative to the background). The range of disparities presented on each chart spanned easy (d’ = 4.5) to difficult (d’ = 0.1) and was adaptively calculated based on the participant’s responses to previous charts. Depth profiles are shown for easy visualization for ring and dip stimuli at the bottom of the figure. C) The responses of the participant (blue circles, error bars indicate 95% binomial standard deviation) were used to calculate d’ as a function of stereoscopic disparity and a decision function was used to estimate the probability of a Yes response (red curve). Green dashed lines indicate 95% confidence intervals at each stereoscopic disparity.
Fig 2.
A) Spatial 2-AFC Ring task: target & null stimuli were presented side-by-side for 1.25 sec. Participants clicked on the left or right side of the screen to indicate whether the right or left stimulus was presented in depth. B) Temporal 2-AFC Dip task: target & null stimuli were presented sequentially for 0.50 sec each, separated by a blank screen for 0.50 sec. Participants clicked on the left or right mouse button to indicate whether the first or second stimulus contained depth. C) The proportion of correct trials as a function of stereoscopic disparity (blue circles, error bars indicate 95% binomial standard deviation) for each spatial frequency were fit with a cumulative gaussian function (red line) green dashed lines indicate 95% confidence limits at each disparity.
Fig 3.
Boxplots of test duration for stereoacuity assessment compared among tests.
Total Test Duration for FInD (3 charts for each of 4 spatial frequencies) for ring and dip stimuli, 2-AFC control experiments (40 trials for 4 interleaved spatial frequencies) for Ring and Dip stimuli, and the clinical tests Titmus and Randot. Test durations are shown in seconds for control (left panel, blue) and binocularly impaired (right panel, magenta) participants. Data points show the results for individual participants expressed by a horizontally jittered kernel density, boxes indicate the 25–75% interquartile range, whiskers represent 1st and 99th percentiles.
Fig 4.
Boxplots of log stereo-thresholds.
Stereoacuity thresholds in log arcsec are shown for A) FInD Ring B) FInD Dip D)2-AFC Ring E) 2-AFC Dip for each test peak spatial frequency 1, 2, 4, 8 c/° and for C) Randot F) Titmus clinical tests. Individual thresholds from control participants are shown as blue data points in the boxes, which indicate the 25–75% interquartile range, whiskers represent 1st and 99th percentiles. Data from participants with impaired binocularity are plotted in magenta and are not included in the boxplot calculations.
Fig 5.
Kendall’s rank correlations (R2) expressed as linear function (red line) between log-stereoacuities generated by Randot, Titmus, FInD Ring and FInD Dip, and the 2-AFC Ring and Dip tests of binocular normally sighted participants on bottom left, and p-values indicated numerically in top right side of graph (red numbers refer to significantly different from null hypothesis). Histograms of data distribution for each test are shown in the diagonal. FInD and 2 AFC data are averaged across spatial frequency conditions.
Fig 6.
Repeatability of FInD Ring, FInD Dip, 2-AFC Ring, 2-AFC Dip, Titmus and Randot tests from 2 runs for A) control participants B) binocularly impaired participants. Blue dots represent control participants (6A) and magenta dots represent binocularly impaired participants 6B). Each panel consists of 6 figures, corresponding to the FInD Ring, FInD Dip, 2-AFC Ring, 2-AFC Dip, Titmus and Randot tests. Each figure contains 1 data point for each participant for Randot and Titmus and 4 data points for each participant, one for each of the 4 spatial frequencies tested for FInD and 2-AFC.
Table 2.
Demographic and optometric summary of cohort for Study 2 experiments.
Fig 7.
A) Participants viewed three AIM charts, each containing a 4*4 grid of 6° ⌀ cells with 100 dots, red in one eye and blue to the other, with a central disparity-defined 5°x1.25° rectangular bar of random orientation. Participants indicated the perceived orientation of the bar by clicking on the corresponding angle on the white ring surrounding each cell. Two black marks indicated the reported orientation and participants could adjust the reported orientation with unlimited further clicks. The range of disparities presented on subsequent charts was adaptively calculated based on their responses to previous charts. Visualization of the depth appearance of the stimuli is presented at the bottom of the figure. B) Angular error function (red line) using AIM paradigm. The y axis depicts the indicated orientation error for each disparity level (x axis). The responses of a representative participant’s indications of each bar orientation error (blue circles) as a function of the stereoscopic disparity of the bar. The dashed green lines are 95% confidence intervals of the fit.
Fig 8.
Test duration using AIM Stereo for run 1 and run 2.
Data are plotted as in Fig 3A.
Fig 9.
Log stereoacuities of Randot, Titmus, and AIM Stereo.
Data are plotted as in Fig 4.
Fig 10.
Kendall’s rank correlations and histograms between Randot, Titmus, and AIM Stereo.
Data are plotted as in Fig 5.
Fig 11.
Bland-Altman tests of AIM Stereo between the two runs.
Data are plotted as in Fig 6.