High-Resolution Eye-Tracking System for Accurate Measurement of Short-Latency Ocular Following Responses: Development and Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Ocular following responses (OFRs)-small-amplitude, short-latency reflexive eye movements-have been used to study visual motion processing, with potential diagnostic applications. However, they are difficult to record with commercial, video-based eye trackers, especially in children. Objective: We aimed to design and develop a noninvasive eye tracker specialized for measuring OFRs, trading off lower temporal resolution and a smaller range for higher spatial resolution. Methods: We developed a high-resolution eye-tracking system based on a high-resolution camera operating in the near-infrared spectral range, coupled with infrared illuminators and a dedicated postprocessing pipeline, optimized to measure OFRs in children. To assess its performance, we: (1) evaluated our algorithm for compensating small head movements in both artificial and real-world settings, (2) compared OFRs measured simultaneously by our system and a reference scleral search coil eye-tracking system, and (3) tested the system's ability to measure OFRs in a clinical setting with children. Results: The simultaneous measurement by our system and a reference system showed that our system achieved an in vivo resolution of approximately 0.06°, which is sufficient for recording OFRs. Head motion compensation was successfully tested, showing a displacement error of less than 5 μm. Finally, robust OFRs were detected in 16 children during recording sessions lasting less than 5 minutes. Conclusions: Our high-resolution, noninvasive eye-tracking system successfully detected OFRs with minimal need for subject cooperation. The system effectively addresses the limits of other OFR measurement methods and offers a versatile solution suitable for clinical applications, particularly in children, where eye tracking is more challenging. The system could potentially be suitable for diagnostic applications, particularly in pediatric populations where early detection of visual disorders like stereodeficiencies is critical.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".