Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eye-tracking while reading is an emerging application where the goal is to track the progression of reading. The challenges for accurate tracking of the reading progression are due to the measurement noise of the eye-tracker and the rapid and uncertain movement of the eye gaze. Solutions to this problem developed in the recent past suffer from many limitations, such as the need to know the text context and the need to have a batch of one page of data for classification. In this article, we relax these assumptions and develop a novel, real-time line classification approach. The proposed solution consists of an improved slip-Kalman smoother (slip-KS) that is designed to detect new line returns and to reduce the variance in the eye-gaze measurements. After preprocessing of the data by the slip-KS, a classification approach is employed to track the lines being read in real-time. Two such classifiers are demonstrated in this article; one is based on Gaussian discriminants, and the other is based on support vector machines. The proposed approaches were tested using realistic eye-gaze data from seven participants. Analysis based on the collected data using the proposed algorithms shows significantly improved performance over existing methods.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".