Improving eye-tracking calibration accuracy using symbolic regression.

Eye tracking systems have recently experienced a diversity of novel calibration procedures, including smooth pursuit and vestibulo-ocular reflex based calibrations. These approaches allowed collecting more data compared to the standard 9-point calibration. However, the computation of the mapping function which provides planar gaze positions from pupil features given as input is mostly based on polynomial regressions, and little work has investigated alternative approaches. This paper fills this gap by providing a new calibration computation method based on symbolic regression. Instead of making prior assumptions on the polynomial transfer function between input and output records, symbolic regression seeks an optimal model among different types of functions and their combinations. This approach offers an interesting perspective in terms of flexibility and accuracy. Therefore, we designed two experiments in which we collected ground truth data to compare vestibulo-ocular and smooth pursuit calibrations based on symbolic regression, both using a marker or a finger as a target, resulting in four different calibrations. As a result, we improved calibration accuracy by more than 30%, with reasonable extra computation time.

Uncertainty visualization of gaze estimation to support operator-controlled calibration.

In this paper, we investigate how visualization assets can support the qualitative evaluation of gaze estimation uncertainty. Although eye tracking data are commonly available, little has been done to visually investigate the uncertainty of recorded gaze information. This paper tries to fill this gap by using innovative uncertainty computation and visualization. Given a gaze processing pipeline, we estimate the location of this gaze position in the world camera. To do so we developed our own gaze data processing which give us access to every stage of the data transformation and thus the uncertainty computation. To validate our gaze estimation pipeline, we designed an experiment with 12 participants and showed that the correction methods we proposed reduced the Mean Angular Error by about 1.32 cm, aggregating all 12 participants' results. The Mean Angular Error is 0.25° (SD=0.15°) after correction of the estimated gaze. Next, to support the qualitative assessment of this data, we provide a map which codes the actual uncertainty in the user point of view.