Cargando…
Quantification of Expected Information Gain in Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Tests
We introduce expected information gain to quantify measurements and apply it to compare visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) tests. We simulated observers with parameters covered by the visual acuity and contrast sensitivity tests and observers based on distributions of normal observers...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Journal Experts
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10275059/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37333239 http://dx.doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3031340/v1 |
_version_ | 1785059833401049088 |
---|---|
author | Lu, Zhong-Lin Zhao, Yukai Lesmes, Luis Andres Dorr, Michael |
author_facet | Lu, Zhong-Lin Zhao, Yukai Lesmes, Luis Andres Dorr, Michael |
author_sort | Lu, Zhong-Lin |
collection | PubMed |
description | We introduce expected information gain to quantify measurements and apply it to compare visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) tests. We simulated observers with parameters covered by the visual acuity and contrast sensitivity tests and observers based on distributions of normal observers tested in three luminance and four Bangerter foil conditions. We first generated the probability distributions of test scores for each individual in each population in the Snellen, ETDRS and qVA visual acuity tests and the Pelli-Robson, CSV-1000 and qCSF contrast sensitivity tests and constructed the probability distributions of all possible test scores of the entire population. We then computed expected information gain by subtracting expected residual entropy from the total entropy of the population. For acuity tests, ETDRS generated more expected information gain than Snellen; scored with VA threshold only or with both VA threshold and VA range, qVA with 15 rows (or 45 optotypes) generated more expected information gain than ETDRS. For contrast sensitivity tests, CSV-1000 generated more expected information gain than Pelli-Robson; scored with AULCSF or with CS at six spatial frequencies, qCSF with 25 trials generated more expected information gain than CSV-1000. The active learning based qVA and qCSF tests can generate more expected information than the traditional paper chart tests. Although we only applied it to compare visual acuity and contrast sensitivity tests, information gain is a general concept that can be used to compare measurements and data analytics in any domain. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10275059 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | American Journal Experts |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102750592023-06-17 Quantification of Expected Information Gain in Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Tests Lu, Zhong-Lin Zhao, Yukai Lesmes, Luis Andres Dorr, Michael Res Sq Article We introduce expected information gain to quantify measurements and apply it to compare visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) tests. We simulated observers with parameters covered by the visual acuity and contrast sensitivity tests and observers based on distributions of normal observers tested in three luminance and four Bangerter foil conditions. We first generated the probability distributions of test scores for each individual in each population in the Snellen, ETDRS and qVA visual acuity tests and the Pelli-Robson, CSV-1000 and qCSF contrast sensitivity tests and constructed the probability distributions of all possible test scores of the entire population. We then computed expected information gain by subtracting expected residual entropy from the total entropy of the population. For acuity tests, ETDRS generated more expected information gain than Snellen; scored with VA threshold only or with both VA threshold and VA range, qVA with 15 rows (or 45 optotypes) generated more expected information gain than ETDRS. For contrast sensitivity tests, CSV-1000 generated more expected information gain than Pelli-Robson; scored with AULCSF or with CS at six spatial frequencies, qCSF with 25 trials generated more expected information gain than CSV-1000. The active learning based qVA and qCSF tests can generate more expected information than the traditional paper chart tests. Although we only applied it to compare visual acuity and contrast sensitivity tests, information gain is a general concept that can be used to compare measurements and data analytics in any domain. American Journal Experts 2023-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10275059/ /pubmed/37333239 http://dx.doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3031340/v1 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) |
spellingShingle | Article Lu, Zhong-Lin Zhao, Yukai Lesmes, Luis Andres Dorr, Michael Quantification of Expected Information Gain in Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Tests |
title | Quantification of Expected Information Gain in Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Tests |
title_full | Quantification of Expected Information Gain in Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Tests |
title_fullStr | Quantification of Expected Information Gain in Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Tests |
title_full_unstemmed | Quantification of Expected Information Gain in Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Tests |
title_short | Quantification of Expected Information Gain in Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Tests |
title_sort | quantification of expected information gain in visual acuity and contrast sensitivity tests |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10275059/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37333239 http://dx.doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3031340/v1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT luzhonglin quantificationofexpectedinformationgaininvisualacuityandcontrastsensitivitytests AT zhaoyukai quantificationofexpectedinformationgaininvisualacuityandcontrastsensitivitytests AT lesmesluisandres quantificationofexpectedinformationgaininvisualacuityandcontrastsensitivitytests AT dorrmichael quantificationofexpectedinformationgaininvisualacuityandcontrastsensitivitytests |