Methods for calibration free and multi-user eye tracking

Lander, Christian

doi:10.1145/2957265.2963116

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, to reduce the number of recalibrations in the experiment, we used a chin rest, which is not a practical solution in most cases. However, while calibration is a necessary part of conventional eye tracking technologies, approaches exist to enable calibration-free eye tracking [29][30][31][32][33], and we expect that this problem could be soon solved in commercial applications. In general, the combined gaze-voice technology necessarily inherits certain issues of the eye tracking-based technology, such as issues in eye pupil tracing in some users, but they could be partly or fully solved with the progress in eye tracking technology.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice as a Mouse Click: Usability and Effectiveness of Simplified Hands-Free Gaze-Voice Selection

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Voice- and gaze-based hands-free input are increasingly used in human-machine interaction. Attempts to combine them into a hybrid technology typically employ the voice channel as an information-rich channel. Voice seems to be “overqualified” to serve simply as a substitute of a computer mouse click, to confirm selections made by gaze. It could be expected that the user would feel discomfort if they had to frequently make “clicks” using their voice, or easily get bored, which also could lead to low performance. To test this, we asked 23 healthy participants to select moving objects with smooth pursuit eye movements. Manual confirmation of selection was faster and rated as more convenient than voice-based confirmation. However, the difference was not high, especially when voice was used to pronounce objects’ numbers (speech recognition was not applied): Score of convenience (M ± SD) was 9.2 ± 1.1 for manual and 8.0 ± 2.1 for voice confirmation, and time spent per object was 1269 ± 265 ms and 1626 ± 331 ms, respectively. We conclude that “voice-as-click” can be used to confirm selection in gaze-based interaction with computers as a substitute for the computer mouse click when manual confirmation cannot be used.

show abstract