MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Multimodal Direct Gaze Interface for Wheelchairs and Teleoperated Robots

2021· article· en· W4200093252 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 43rd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGazeTeleoperationWheelchairInterface (matter)RobotInput deviceUser interfaceTelerobotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gaze-based interfaces are especially useful for people with disabilities involving the upper limbs or hands. Typically, users select from a number of options (e.g. letters or commands) displayed on a screen by gazing at the desired option. However, in some applications, e.g. gaze-based driving, it may be dangerous to direct gaze away from the environment towards a separate display. In addition, a purely gaze based interface can present a high cognitive load to users, as gaze is not normally used for selection and/or control, but rather for other purposes, such as information gathering. To address these issues, this paper presents a cost-effective multi-modal system for gaze based driving which combines appearance-based gaze estimates derived from webcam images with push button inputs that trigger command execution. This system uses an intuitive "direct interface", where users determine the direction of motion by gazing in the corresponding direction in the environment. We have implemented the system for both wheelchair control and robotic teleoperation. The use of our system should provide substantial benefits for patients with severe motor disabilities, such as ALS, by providing them with a more natural and affordable method of wheelchair control. We compare the performance of our system to the more conventional and common "indirect" system where gaze is used to select commands from a separate display, showing that our system enables faster and more efficient navigation.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 43rd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC)Same topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207