MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990854389 · doi:10.1167/19.13.17

The Neyman Pearson detection of microsaccades with maximum likelihood estimation of parameters

2019· article· en· W2990854389 on OpenAlexaff
Hongzhi Zhu, Septimiu E. Salcudean, Robert Rohling

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrosaccadeSaccadic maskingSaccadeComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEye trackingEye movementComputer visionGazePattern recognition (psychology)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the fact that the velocity threshold method is widely applied, the detection of microsaccades continues to be a challenging problem, due to gaze-tracking inaccuracy and the transient nature of microsaccades. Important parameters associated with a saccadic event, e.g., saccade duration, amplitude, and maximum velocity, are sometimes imprecisely estimated, which may lead to biases in inferring the roles of microsaccades in perception and cognition. To overcome the biases and have a better detection algorithm for microsaccades, we propose a novel statistical model for the tracked gaze positions during eye fixations. In this model, we incorporate a parametrization that has been previously applied to model saccades, which allows us to veridically capture the velocity profile of saccadic eye movements. Based on our model, we derive the Neyman Pearson Detector (NPD) for saccadic events. Implemented in conjunction with the maximum likelihood estimation method, our NPD can detect a saccadic event and estimate all parameters simultaneously. Because of its adaptive nature and its statistical optimality, our NPD method was able to better detect microsaccades in some datasets when compared with a recently proposed state-of-the-art method based on convolutional neural networks. NPD also yielded comparable performance with a recently developed Bayesian algorithm, with the added benefit of modeling a more biologically veridical velocity profile of the saccade. As opposed to these algorithms, NPD can lend itself better to online saccade detection, and thus has potential for human-computer interaction applications. Our algorithm is publicly available at https://github.com/hz-zhu/NPD-micro-saccade-detection.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207