Talk:Difference of Gaussians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Concerning the new addition, does the author behind it have a reference on the new statement "with K~1.6 for approximating a Laplacian Of Gaussian and K~5 in the retina"? According to my humble opinion, the Laplacian can be well approximated also for other values of K. Tpl 13:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Since no reply has been received concerning the previous question and this statement is neither correct and nor supported by any references I have removed this statement. Tpl 08:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I've not been fast enough! 1.6 is the best fit using MSE. 5 is the best fit using physiological data (though there exist a wide heteregenoity) see http://retina.anatomy.upenn.edu/~lance/modelmath/enroth_freeman.html. main fact is that it's wider than a LOG. Meduz 13:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Please clarify one point. I'm almost sure, but not positive, that K is the constant scaling factor between the standard deviations of the two Gaussians? As in sigma2 = K*sigma1? Also any comments of the practical effects of different K values? As in: larger K values would result in wider but shallower lobes on the function so larger K values will respond less strongly if 'blobs' of become too close (spatially). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigyk (talk • contribs) 21:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)