MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377014196 · doi:10.1145/3591126

Classification of Alzheimer's using Deep-learning Methods on Webcam-based Gaze Data

2023· article· en· W4377014196 on OpenAlex

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

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of the Fraser ValleyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGazeComputer scienceBitTorrent trackerEye trackingArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Computer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been increasing interest in non-invasive predictors of Alzheimer's disease (AD) as an initial screen for this condition. Previously, successful attempts leveraged eye-tracking and language data generated during picture narration and reading tasks. These results were obtained with high-end, expensive eye-trackers. Instead, we explore classification using eye-tracking data collected with a webcam, where our classifiers are built using a deep-learning approach. Our results show that the webcam gaze classifier is not as good as the classifier based on high-end eye-tracking data. However, the webcam-based classifier still beats the majority-class baseline classifier in terms of AU-ROC, indicating that predictive signals can be extracted from webcam gaze tracking. Hence, although our results indicate that there is still a long way to go before webcam gaze tracking can reach practical relevance, they still provide an encouraging proof of concept that this technology should be further explored as an affordable alternative to high-end eye-trackers for the detection of AD.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.001
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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.179 · 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