Improving the Accuracy and Reliability of Remote System-Calibration-Free Eye-Gaze Tracking
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Remote eye-gaze tracking provides a means for nonintrusive tracking of the point-of-gaze (POG) of a user. For application as a user interface for the disabled, a remote system that is noncontact, reliable, and permits head motion is very desirable. The system-calibration-free pupil-corneal reflection (P-CR) vector technique for POG estimation is a popular method due to its simplicity, however, accuracy has been shown to be degraded with head displacement. Model-based POG-estimation methods were developed, which improve system accuracy during head displacement, however, these methods require complex system calibration in addition to user calibration. In this paper, the use of multiple corneal reflections and point-pattern matching allows for a scaling correction of the P-CR vector for head displacements as well as an improvement in system robustness to corneal reflection distortion, leading to improved POG-estimation accuracy. To demonstrate the improvement in performance, the enhanced multiple corneal reflection P-CR method is compared to the monocular and binocular accuracy of the traditional single corneal reflection P-CR method, and a model-based method of POG estimation for various head displacements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it