MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Detection and Correspondence Matching of Corneal Reflections for Eye Tracking Using Deep Learning

2021· article· en· W3160049074 on OpenAlex
Soumil Chugh, Braiden Brousseau, Jonathan Rose, Moshe Eizenman

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceEye trackingGazeBitTorrent trackerEye tracking on the ISSRotation (mathematics)OpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eye tracking systems that estimate the point-of-gaze are essential in extended reality (XR) systems as they enable new interaction paradigms and technological improvements. It is important for these systems to maintain accuracy when the headset moves relative to the head (known as device slippage) due to head movements or user adjustment. One of the most accurate eye tracking techniques, which is also insensitive to shifts of the system relative to the head, uses two or more infrared (IR) light emitting diodes to illuminate the eye and an IR camera to capture images of the eye. An essential step in estimating the point-of-gaze in these systems is the precise determination of the location of two or more corneal reflections (virtual images of the IR-LEDs that illuminate the eye) in images of the eye. Eye trackers tend to have multiple light sources to ensure at least one pair of reflections for each gaze position. The use of multiple light sources introduces a difficult problem: the need to match the corneal reflections with the corresponding light source over the range of expected eye movements. Corneal reflection detection and matching often fail in XR systems due to the proximity of camera and steep illumination angles of light sources with respect to the eye. The failures are caused by corneal reflections having varying shape and intensity levels or disappearance due to rotation of the eye, or the presence of spurious reflections. We have developed a fully convolutional neural network, based on the UNET architecture, that solves the detection and matching problem in the presence of spurious and missing reflections. Eye images of 25 people were collected in a virtual reality headset using a binocular eye tracking module consisting of five infrared light sources per eye. A set of 4,000 eye images were manually labelled for each of the corneal reflections, and data augmentation was used to generate a dataset of 40,000 images. The network is able to correctly identify and match 91% of corneal reflections present in the test set. This is comparable to a state-of-the-art deep learning system, but our approach requires 33 times less memory and executes 10 times faster. The proposed algorithm, when used in an eye tracker in a VR system, achieved an average mean absolute gaze error of 1°. This is a significant improvement over the state-of-the-art learning-based XR eye tracking systems that have reported gaze errors of 2-3°.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207