MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080435016 · doi:10.1145/1056808.1057041

Media eyepliances

2005· article· en· W2080435016 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocus (optics)Computer scienceModality (human–computer interaction)Selection (genetic algorithm)Point (geometry)Human–computer interactionMultimediaArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the use of eye contact sensing for focus selection operations in remote controlled media appliances. Focus selection with remote controls tends to be cumbersome as selection buttons place the remote in a device-specific modality. We addressed this issue with the design of Media EyePliances, home theatre appliances augmented with a digital eye contact sensor. An appliance is selected as the focus of remote commands by looking at its sensor. A central server subsequently routes all commands provided by remote, keyboard or voice input to the focus EyePliance. We discuss a calibration-free digital eye contact sensing technique that allows Media EyePliances to determine the user's point of gaze.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207