MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413949908 · doi:10.1016/j.mex.2025.103607

EyeMap: A fusion-based method for eye movement-based visual attention maps as predictive markers of parkinsonism

2025· article· en· W4413949908 on OpenAlexaff
S Akshay, J. Amudha, Amitabh Bhattacharya, Nitish Kamble, Pramod Kumar Pal

Bibliographic record

VenueMethodsX · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences
KeywordsEye movementParkinsonismArtificial intelligenceFusionComputer scienceComputer visionMovement (music)NeurosciencePsychologyPattern recognition (psychology)MedicineArtPathologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EyeMap is a method for visualizing and classifying eye movement patterns using scanpaths, fixation heatmaps, and gridded Areas of Interest (AOIs). EyeMap combines predictions from modality-specific machine learning and deep learning models using a late-fusion technique to produce interpretable gaze representations. By collecting spatial, temporal, and regional elements of gaze data, the method enhances diagnostic interpretability and enables the detection of Parkinsonian symptoms. This method provides complementary perspectives on gaze behavior, encompassing spatial focus, temporal scan order, and attention allocation across regions of interest. A dataset consisting of visualizations of organized visual tasks completed by both PD patients and healthy controls is created to support the development and validation of this method. EyeMap shows that vision-driven models may detect PD-specific gaze anomalies without the need for manual feature engineering. All implementation steps, from data acquisition to model fusion, are fully described to enable reproducibility and potential adaptation to other gaze-based analysis contexts.1.A structured method was developed to visualize eye-tracking data in three distinct formats2.Classification outputs from separate gaze visualizations were combined using softmax-level fusion3.A new eye-tracking dataset was generated to support method development and reproducibility.

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)0.003
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethodsXSame topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207