MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129212220 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2021.3062256

A Fusion Algorithm for Saccade Eye Movement Enhancement With EOG and Lumped-Element Models

2021· article· en· W3129212220 on OpenAlexafffund
P. D. S. H. Gunawardane, Raymond R. MacNeil, Leo Zhao, James T. Enns, Clarence W. de Silva, Mu Chiao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSaccadeElectrooculographyEye movementComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionKalman filterMorlet waveletNoise (video)Band-pass filterFilter (signal processing)BiosignalWaveletWavelet transformAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)EngineeringElectronic engineeringDiscrete wavelet transform

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrooculography (EOG) can be used to measure eye movements while the eyelids are open or closed and to assist in the diagnosis of certain eye diseases. However, challenges in biosignal acquisition and processing lead to limited accuracy, limited resolution (both temporal and spatial), as well as difficulties in reducing noise and detecting artifacts. Methods such as finite impulse response, wavelet transforms, and averaging filters have been used to denoise and enhance EOG measurements. However, these filters are not specifically designed to detect saccades, and so key features (e.g., saccade amplitude) can be over-filtered and distorted as a consequence of the filtering process. Here we present a model-based fusion technique to enhance saccade features within noisy and raw EOG signals. Specifically, we focus on Westheimer (WH) and linear reciprocal (LR) eye models with a Kalman filter. EOG signals were measured using OpenBCI's Cyton Board (at 250 Hz), and these measurements were compared with a state-of-the-art EyeLink 1000 (EL; 250 Hz) eye tracker. On average, the LR model-based KF produced a 47% improvement of measurement accuracy over the bandpass filters. Thus, we conclude that our LR model-based KF outperforms standard bandpass filtering techniques in reducing noise, eliminating artifacts, and restoring missing features of saccade signatures present within EOG signals.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207