AJP - Regu AJP: Advances in Physiology Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 258: R813-R819, 1990;
0363-6119/90 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Myers, G. A.
Right arrow Articles by Stark, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Myers, G. A.
Right arrow Articles by Stark, L.

AJP - Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, Vol 258, Issue 3 813-R819, Copyright © 1990 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Light and target distance interact to control pupil size

G. A. Myers, S. Barez, W. C. Krenz and L. Stark
Department of Engineering Science, University of California, Berkeley 94720.

Light and target distance stimuli were presented to normal human subjects, and their pupillary responses were measured. A homeomorphic computer model of the pupillary control system is presented in which the form of interaction of controller signals due to light and target distance was investigated. The error remaining when model parameters were optimized to fit experimental pupil size (area or diameter) was smaller for the linear interaction hypothesis than for either power law or logical law interaction. A generalized second-order nonlinear model with six parameters (vs. 3 for each of the other models) yielded somewhat lower residual error. With the use of a modified Akaike information criterion, the value (in an information theoretic sense) of the improved fit afforded by the three additional parameters in the generalized nonlinear model was shown to be small, and thus the generalized second-order nonlinear model was rejected in favor of the simpler and more parsimonious linear model.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online