arXiv:2502.10570v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Mobile gaze tracking on handheld devices commonly relies on \emph{appearance-based 2D gaze estimation} from the device's \emph{front-facing R...
By Yaxiong Lei, Yuheng Wang, Fergus Buchanan, Mingyue Zhao, Yusuke Sugano, Shijing He, Mohamed Khamis, Juan Ye
arXiv:2610.00922v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Gaze estimation under natural head-eye motion underpins applications from driver monitoring to human-computer interaction. Single-frame methods predict...
By Jungmin Lee, Niamat Ullah, Yoseob Han
arXiv:2608.29739v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Geometric eye trackers can provide the spatial accuracy required for gaze-based interaction and multimodal studies, but their measurements remain sensi...
By Jiaqi Liu, Zixuan Wang, Yuhong Zhang, Dingkang Liang, Jane Hanqi Li, Tzyy-Ping Jung, Gert Cauwenberghs
The paper introduces the Causal Context-Gated Forecaster (CCGF) for predicting a driver's gaze during dashboard-mounted tracker dropouts. CCGF uses a 60‑frame history of gaze and head pose combined with DINOv3 scene features, and a learned reliability gate adjusts the influence of these inputs as the dropout progresses. Experiments on 2,047 naturalistic driving events show that live scene updates reduce median error by 33% compared to history‑only forecasting, while frozen scene input yields higher error, demonstrating the value of real‑time scene information.
By Shabnam Shabani, Ghazal Farhani
This paper evaluates current gaze estimation methods in a human‑robot interaction setting using the NICO robotic platform. A new annotated dataset was collected, and four state‑of‑the‑art models were tested, showing angular errors comparable to general benchmarks. In the shared workspace, the best median error was 14.57 cm, highlighting practical limitations and prompting recommendations for integrating gaze estimation into HRI systems.
By Matej Palider, Omar Eldardeer, Viktor Kocur
arXiv:2608. 08947v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current hazard detection systems in autonomous driving may develop mesa objectives, learned internal goals that achieve high training performance through spurious correlations rather than genuine hazard recognition.
By Lennox Anderson, Ahmed Boutar, Jonah Mulcrone, Tal Erez
EgoHRV is a method that estimates heart rate variability (HRV) and heart rate (HR) from the gaze cameras in egocentric headsets. It uses a 3D backbone and a low–high decomposition module to extract the blood volume pulse signal from gaze video, and aligns frequency‑domain representations of contact‑based and camera‑derived signals through cross‑domain pretraining. The approach achieves state‑of‑the‑art accuracy for HR and HRV estimation and, when integrated into EgoExo4D’s proficiency estimator, improves accuracy by 17.8%.
arXiv:2609.10139v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Driver gaze provides information regarding driver visual attention and situational awareness to the surrounding traffic. Existing driver gaze estimatio...
By Pavan Kumar Sharma, Ayush Pande, Pranamesh Chakraborty
arXiv:2607. 05473v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: According to commonly consented theories, the minimum hardware requirement for gaze tracker is one camera and two light sources to realize gaze estimation with free head movements.
By Tongbing Huang, Yang Fu, Yunfei Wang, Zhaocan Wang
arXiv:2602. 14834v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Human eye movements in visual recognition reflect a balance between foveal sampling and peripheral context.
By Pengcheng Pan, Yonekura Shogo, Yasuo Kuniyosh
arXiv:2608. 15614v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The use of multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) for egocentric video understanding with wearable devices is constrained by the token budget.
By Matteo Stoiber, Niels Buus Lassen
GazeFS is a model that predicts and stabilizes target‑centered gaze trajectories using a variable‑length gaze‑head history, without requiring target information during inference. It maps this history to the next target‑center direction and a short‑horizon Search/Focus estimate, improving focus target centering and reducing residual gaze error. Across 7,960 acquisition episodes from 30 participants, GazeFS reduces Focus episode bias, dispersion, and P90 target error by 0.182°, 0.257°, and 0.400°, respectively, while maintaining high phase‑balanced accuracy and AUPRC.
By Yaozheng Xia, Zaiping Zhu, Bo Pang, Minghao Xie, Hui Li, Shaorong Wang, Sheng Li