MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410611083 · doi:10.1145/3725833

EarEOG: Using Headphones and Around-the-Ear EOG Signals for Real-Time Wheelchair Control

2025· article· en· W4410611083 on OpenAlexaff
Peichen Liu, Sadasivan Puthusserypady, I. Scott MacKenzie, Cihan Uyanik, John Paulin Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeadphonesWheelchairComputer scienceElectrooculographyAudiologySpeech recognitionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineEngineeringArtificial intelligenceEye movementElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present EarEOG, a real-time wheelchair control system using around-ear electrooculogram (EOG) signals. Electrodes are placed in standard over-the-ear headphones to improve user comfort. By detecting around-the-ear signals from eye gestures and jaw clenching, EarEOG offers a non-invasive and intuitive approach to low-latency wheelchair control. We describe the methods for signal acquisition, as well as the algorithms used for signal processing and classification. The feasibility, robustness, and low latency of EarEOG were confirmed through two experiments. The algorithm demonstrated a classification accuracy of 94.1% for all motion signals, which further improved to 97.3% when personalized models were applied. To ensure stability, we examined electrode impedance and algorithm accuracy across multiple trials where participants operated simulated wheelchairs while wearing EarEOG. The results indicated that when the electrode impedance was below 1 MΩ, all participants successfully controlled the simulated wheelchair. Furthermore, EarEOG demonstrated low latency, with recognition delays of less than 125 ms.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0020.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionSame topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207