MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109912146 · doi:10.1518/hfes.45.2.307.27235

Gaze-Contingent Multiresolutional Displays: An Integrative Review

2003· review· en· W2109912146 on OpenAlexaff
Eyal M. Reingold, Lester C. Loschky, George W. McConkie, David M. Stampe

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer visionGazeArtificial intelligenceTeleconferenceVirtual realityTransmission (telecommunications)TeleoperationRobotMultimediaTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gaze-contingent multiresolutional displays (GCMRDs) center high-resolution information on the user's gaze position, matching the user's area of interest (AOI). Image resolution and details outside the AOI are reduced, lowering the requirements for processing resources and transmission bandwidth in demanding display and imaging applications. This review provides a general framework within which GCMRD research can be integrated, evaluated, and guided. GCMRDs (or "moving windows") are analyzed in terms of (a) the nature of their images (i.e., "multiresolution," "variable resolution," "space variant," or "level of detail"), and (b) the movement of the AOI (i.e., "gaze contingent," "foveated," or "eye slaved"). We also synthesize the known human factors research on GCMRDs and point out important questions for future research and development. Actual or potential applications of this research include flight, medical, and driving simulators; virtual reality; remote piloting and teleoperation; infrared and indirect vision; image transmission and retrieval; telemedicine; video teleconferencing; and artificial vision systems.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations116
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics SocietySame topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207