MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Probabilistic Model for Visual Driver Gaze Approximation from Head Pose Estimation

2020· article· en· W3126264610 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Shirpour, Steven S. Beauchemin, Michael Bauer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGazeComputer scienceProbabilistic logicComputer visionArtificial intelligenceAdvanced driver assistance systemsProcess (computing)Gaussian processHead (geology)KrigingSituation awarenessInterval (graph theory)Eye trackingVisual searchVisual angleHuman–computer interactionGaussianMachine learningEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The direction of a vehicle driver's visual attention plays an essential role in the research on Advanced Driving Assistance Systems (ADAS) and autonomous vehicles. How a driver monitors the surrounding environment is at least partially descriptive of the driver's situational awareness. While driver gaze is not explicitly related to head pose due to the interplay between head and eye movements, it may still provide an approximation of the visual attention that is sufficiently accurate for many applications. In this research, we propose a probabilistic method for describing the visual attention of drivers. This method applies a Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) technique that estimates the probability of the driver gaze direction, given head pose. We evaluate our model on real data collected during drives with an experimental vehicle in urban and suburban areas. Our experimental results show that 82.5% of drivers' gaze lies within the 95% confidence interval predicted by our framework.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207