MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377996913 · doi:10.1145/3588015.3588413

On The Visibility Of Fiducial Markers For Mobile Eye Tracking

2023· article· en· W4377996913 on OpenAlexafffund
Naila Ayala, Diako Mardanbegi, Andrew T. Duchowski, Ewa Niechwiej‐Szwedo, Shi Cao, Suzanne K. Kearns, Elizabeth L. Irving

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsCMC Microsystems (Canada)University of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFiducial markerComputer visionComputer scienceGazeArtificial intelligenceEye trackingVisibilityDistractionFixation (population genetics)Tracking (education)MedicinePsychologyOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invisible fiducial markers are introduced for localization of Areas Of Interest (AOIs) in mobile eye tracking applications. Fiducial markers are made invisible through the use of film passing Infra-Red (IR) light while blocking the visible spectrum. An IR light source is used to illuminate the markers which are then detected by an IR-sensitive camera, but which are imperceptible by the human eye. We provide the first empirical study that demonstrates such invisible markers are not distracting to a given task, as demonstrated in a flight simulator where distraction of visible and invisible markers are compared between experienced and novice pilots. Fixation frequency and subjective distraction scores showed that visible markers disrupted natural gaze behaviour, particularly in novice pilots. Our findings show that invisible markers should be used when there is a need for them to remain inconspicuous.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207