{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02708803611738149, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014672686230248307, 'mean_word_length': 4.81311475409836, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Spatial vision of the cat: Variation with eccentricity

Abstract We examined the grating acuity and contrast sensitivity of cats whose eye position was monitored with a scleral search-coil technique. During each trial, the cat was required to maintain fixation on a laser spot and respond to the presence or the absence of a grating by pressing a right or left pedal. With this procedure, acuity was measured along the horizontal and vertical meridian over a range of eccentricities in the nasal, temporal, superior, and inferior retina. In addition, contrast sensitivity for stationary and drifting gratings was measured for the temporal retina along the horizontal meridian. Acuity in area centralis reached about 3.5 cycle\deg and declined by 0.5 octaves at 4 deg and by about 1.3 octaves at 16-deg eccentricity in the nasal retina. The acuity was higher in the nasal than temporal retina. At all eccentricities, spatial resolution exceeded the resolution limit derived from Y (alpha)-cell properties. Contrast sensitivity also decreased as the eccentricity increased when the target size was held constant. The slope of sensitivity-eccentricity function was relatively shallow for a low spatial frequency (0.30 cycle\deg) with sensitivity decreasing by a factor of 1.5–2 at 8-deg eccentricity. The slope of the sensitivity falloff for high spatial-frequency gratings (1.2 cycle\deg) was steeper, with a 5–10-fold difference in sensitivity between 0 and 8 deg. By varying the target size, we determined that the summation area in the cat is about a factor of 3 smaller in area centralis than a 16-deg eccentricity. When the size of the centrally and peripherally viewed targets was scaled relative to visual acuity, the sensitivity was constant across the visual field.