Gaze Tracking for Eye-Hand Coordination Training Systems in Virtual Reality
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
Eye-hand coordination training systems are used to improve user performance during fast movements in sports training. In this work, we explored gaze tracking in a Virtual Reality (VR) sports training system with a VR headset. Twelve subjects performed a pointing study with or without passive haptic feedback. Results showed that subjects spent an average of 0.55 s to visually find and another 0.25 s before their finger selected a target. We also identified that, passive haptic feedback did not increase the performance of the user. Moreover, gaze tracker accuracy significantly deteriorated when subjects looked below their eye level. Our results also point out that practitioners/trainers should focus on reducing the time spent on searching for the next target to improve their performance through VR eye-hand coordination training systems. We believe that current VR eye-hand coordination training systems are ready to be evaluated with athletes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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