Ice hockey spectators use contextual cues to guide predictive eye movements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eye movements are an integral part of human visual perception. They allow us to have a small foveal region with exquisite acuity and at the same time a large visual field. For a long time, eye movements were regarded as machine-like behaviors in response to visual stimulation1Lisberger S.G. Visual guidance of smooth pursuit eye movements.Annu. Rev. Vis. Sci. 2015; 1: 447-468Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, but over the past few decades it has been convincingly shown that expectations, intended actions, rewards and many other cognitive factors can have profound effects on the way we move our eyes2Yarbus A.L. Eye Movements and Vision. Springer, Boston, MA1967Crossref Google Scholar, 3Tatler B.W. Hayhoe M.M. Land M.F. Ballard D.H. Eye guidance in natural vision: Reinterpreting salience.J. Vis. 2011; 11: 5Crossref PubMed Scopus (182) Google Scholar, 4Kowler E. Rubinstein J.F. Santos E.M. Wang J. Predictive smooth pursuit eye movements.Annu. Rev. Vis. Sci. 2019; 5: 223-246Crossref PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar. In order to be useful, our oculomotor system must minimize delay with respect to the dynamic events in the visual scene. The ability to do so has been demonstrated in situations where we are in control of these events, for example when we are making a sandwich or tea5Land M.F. Hayhoe M. In what ways do eye movements contribute to everyday activities?.Vis. Res. 2001; 41: 3559-3565Crossref PubMed Scopus (672) Google Scholar, and when we are active participants, for example when hitting a cricket ball6Land M.F. McLeod P. From eye movements to actions: How batsmen hit the ball.Nat. Neurosci. 2000; 3: 1340-1345Crossref PubMed Scopus (523) Google Scholar. But what about scenes with complex dynamics that we do not control or directly take part in, like a hockey game we are watching as a spectator? A semantic influence on gaze fixation location during viewing of tennis videos has been suggested before7Henderson J.M. Gaze control as prediction.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2017; 21: 15-23Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (96) Google Scholar. Here we use carefully annotated hockey videos to show that the brain is indeed able to exploit the semantic context of the game to anticipate the continuous motion of the puck, leading to eye movements that are fundamentally different than when following exactly the same motion without any context.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".