Computer-Aided Screening of Autism Spectrum Disorder: Eye-Tracking Study Using Data Visualization and Deep Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The early diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is highly desirable but remains a challenging task, which requires a set of cognitive tests and hours of clinical examinations. In addition, variations of such symptoms exist, which can make the identification of ASD even more difficult. Although diagnosis tests are largely developed by experts, they are still subject to human bias. In this respect, computer-assisted technologies can play a key role in supporting the screening process. OBJECTIVE: This paper follows on the path of using eye tracking as an integrated part of screening assessment in ASD based on the characteristic elements of the eye gaze. This study adds to the mounting efforts in using eye tracking technology to support the process of ASD screening. METHODS: The proposed approach basically aims to integrate eye tracking with visualization and machine learning. A group of 59 school-aged participants took part in the study. The participants were invited to watch a set of age-appropriate photographs and videos related to social cognition. Initially, eye-tracking scanpaths were transformed into a visual representation as a set of images. Subsequently, a convolutional neural network was trained to perform the image classification task. RESULTS: The experimental results demonstrated that the visual representation could simplify the diagnostic task and also attained high accuracy. Specifically, the convolutional neural network model could achieve a promising classification accuracy. This largely suggests that visualizations could successfully encode the information of gaze motion and its underlying dynamics. Further, we explored possible correlations between the autism severity and the dynamics of eye movement based on the maximal information coefficient. The findings primarily show that the combination of eye tracking, visualization, and machine learning have strong potential in developing an objective tool to assist in the screening of ASD. CONCLUSIONS: Broadly speaking, the approach we propose could be transferable to screening for other disorders, particularly neurodevelopmental disorders.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".