Monocular gaze depth estimation using the vestibulo-ocular reflex

Mardanbegi, Diako; Clarke, Christopher; Gellersen, Hans

doi:10.1145/3314111.3319822

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In analogy, insight into hand-eye coordination [64] has been foundational for instance for gaze prediction from manual action [24,62], gaze-enhanced manual input [79] and multimodal techniques that fully integrate hand and eye input [50,51]. We surmise that there is equivalent potential for leveraging knowledge of eye coordination with head and body, and propose novel gaze depth estimation, pointing and selection techniques in follow-on work [37,61].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye, Head and Torso Coordination During Gaze Shifts in Virtual Reality

Sidenmark

Gellersen

2019

ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans perform gaze shifts naturally through a combination of eye, head and body movements. Although gaze has been long studied as input modality for interaction, this has previously ignored the coordination of the eyes, head and body. This article reports a study of gaze shifts in virtual reality aimed to address the gap and inform design. We identify general eye, head and torso coordination patterns and provide an analysis of the relative movements’ contribution and temporal alignment. We quantify effects of target distance, direction and user posture, describe preferred eye-in-head motion ranges and identify a high variability in head movement tendency. Study insights lead us to propose gaze zones that reflect different levels of contribution from eye, head and body. We discuss design implications for HCI and VR, and in conclusion argue to treat gaze as multimodal input, and eye, head and body movement as synergetic in interaction design.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye, Head and Torso Coordination During Gaze Shifts in Virtual Reality

Sidenmark

Gellersen

2019

ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fixation dot was black, it contained two lines crossing at the center, and had a diameter of 5 cm, which provided a good fixation target also for myopic participants. The target distance of 3 m was chosen to minimize the effect of vergence on VOR gain, as it is well known that VOR gain increases with decreasing target distance ( 3 , 9 ) and that this effect vanishes at distances of more than 2 meters ( 4 ). First, the study device was calibrated with the participants sequentially fixating five laser dots on the wall 3 meters in front of them.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Binocular video head impulse test: Normative data study

Striteska¹,

Chovanec²,

Steinmetzer³

et al. 2023

Front. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe video head impulse test (vHIT) evaluates the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR). It’s usually recorded from only one eye. Newer vHIT devices allow a binocular quantification of the VOR.Purpose (Aim)To investigate the advantages of simultaneously recorded binocular vHIT (bvHIT) to detect the differences between the VOR gains of the adducting and the abducting eye, to define the most precise VOR measure, and to assess gaze dys/conjugacy. We aimed to establish normative values for bvHIT adducting/abducting eye VOR gains and to introduce the VOR dysconjugacy ratio (vorDR) between adducting and abducting eyes for bvHIT.MethodsWe enrolled 44 healthy adult participants in a cross-sectional, prospective study using a repeated-measures design to assess test–retest reliability. A binocular EyeSeeCam Sci 2 device was used to simultaneously record bvHIT from both eyes during impulsive head stimulation in the horizontal plane.ResultsPooled bvHIT retest gains of the adducting eye significantly exceeded those of the abducting eye (mean (SD): 1.08 (SD = 0.06), 0.95 (SD = 0.06), respectively). Both adduction and abduction gains showed similar variability, suggesting comparable precision and therefore equal suitability for VOR asymmetry assessment. The pooled vorDR here introduced to bvHIT was 1.13 (SD = 0.05). The test–retest repeatability coefficient was 0.06.ConclusionOur study provides normative values reflecting the conjugacy of eye movement responses to horizontal bvHIT in healthy participants. The results were similar to a previous study using the gold-standard scleral search coil, which also reported greater VOR gains in the adducting than in the abducting eye. In analogy to the analysis of saccade conjugacy, we propose the use of a novel bvHIT dysconjugacy ratio to assess dys/conjugacy of VOR-induced eye movements. In addition, to accurately assess VOR asymmetry, and to avoid directional gain preponderance between adduction and abduction VOR-induced eye movements leading to monocular vHIT bias, we recommend using a binocular ductional VOR asymmetry index that compares the VOR gains of only the abduction or only the adduction movements of both eyes.

show abstract

“…The vergence-based methods generally include indirect and direct methods. These indirect techniques first compute vergence-related features from near-eye images, e.g., Interpupillary Distance (IPD), and then use them to regress the gaze depth [43,48,50]. For instance, Alt et al detected the pupil diameter and IPD to estimate gaze depth and hence enabled gaze-based interaction with 3D virtual objects [8].…”

Section: Gaze Depth Estimationmentioning

confidence: 99%