跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.04946 · v1

How Well Does Webcam Eye Tracking Work "in the Wild"? A Large-Scale Validation of Chiasm and a Comparison with WebGazer

首次提交 2026-11-03 22:10
版本更新 2026-11-03 22:10
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:39
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Webcam eye tracking can greatly accelerate data collection in basic and applied research by reaching large, diverse samples of participants online. However, its spatial performance is considered well below that of hardware-based systems, limiting its use. We evaluated the first-generation Chiasm webcam eye tracker in a large online study ($N = 505$) spanning diverse participants, devices, and recording conditions. Chiasm achieved a mean spatial accuracy of 2.39 cm ($\approx 2.28^\circ$ at 60 cm), spatial precision (SD) of 1.05 cm ($\approx 1.00^\circ$ at 60 cm), and sample-to-sample precision (RMS-S2S) of 1.29 cm ($\approx 1.23^\circ$ at 60 cm). For the 91% of participants who met a 3 cm calibration criterion, spatial accuracy was 2.15 cm ($\approx 2.05^\circ$ at 60 cm). After three minutes of a task that encouraged head movement, spatial accuracy declined by 0.59 cm, while the gaze center at each target shifted by a mean distance of only 0.37 cm. On the validation block, the offset was 0.30 cm larger for men than for women. Age, region of residence, face luminance, and Michelson contrast showed no reliable relationship with spatial accuracy. A higher eye aspect ratio, a more open eye, was associated with a smaller offset. Wearing glasses decreased spatial accuracy on every validation block. In a comparison between a random subsample ($N = 101$) and a separate sample tested with the open-source tracker WebGazer ($N = 101$) using an identical protocol, Chiasm showed better spatial accuracy (2.18 vs. 4.51 cm) and spatial precision (SD; 1.01 vs. 1.55 cm). WebGazer showed better sample-to-sample precision (RMS-S2S; 0.79 vs. 1.26 cm), which likely reflects conservative, over-smoothed estimates rather than superior stability. These results suggest that Chiasm is narrowing the gap between webcam and hardware-based eye tracking, making large-scale gaze research "in the wild" a reality.

作者备注:37 pages, 21 figures, 2 tables

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-03 22:10 · 最新观测版本

How Well Does Webcam Eye Tracking Work "in the Wild"? A Large-Scale Validation of Chiasm and a Comparison with WebGazer

Webcam eye tracking can greatly accelerate data collection in basic and applied research by reaching large, diverse samples of participants online. However, its spatial performance is considered well below that of hardware-based systems, limiting its use. We evaluated the first-generation Chiasm webcam eye tracker in a large online study ($N = 505$) spanning diverse participants, devices, and recording conditions. Chiasm achieved a mean spatial accuracy of 2.39 cm ($\approx 2.28^\circ$ at 60 cm), spatial precision (SD) of 1.05 cm ($\approx 1.00^\circ$ at 60 cm), and sample-to-sample precision (RMS-S2S) of 1.29 cm ($\approx 1.23^\circ$ at 60 cm). For the 91% of participants who met a 3 cm calibration criterion, spatial accuracy was 2.15 cm ($\approx 2.05^\circ$ at 60 cm). After three minutes of a task that encouraged head movement, spatial accuracy declined by 0.59 cm, while the gaze center at each target shifted by a mean distance of only 0.37 cm. On the validation block, the offset was 0.30 cm larger for men than for women. Age, region of residence, face luminance, and Michelson contrast showed no reliable relationship with spatial accuracy. A higher eye aspect ratio, a more open eye, was associated with a smaller offset. Wearing glasses decreased spatial accuracy on every validation block. In a comparison between a random subsample ($N = 101$) and a separate sample tested with the open-source tracker WebGazer ($N = 101$) using an identical protocol, Chiasm showed better spatial accuracy (2.18 vs. 4.51 cm) and spatial precision (SD; 1.01 vs. 1.55 cm). WebGazer showed better sample-to-sample precision (RMS-S2S; 0.79 vs. 1.26 cm), which likely reflects conservative, over-smoothed estimates rather than superior stability. These results suggest that Chiasm is narrowing the gap between webcam and hardware-based eye tracking, making large-scale gaze research "in the wild" a reality.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗