Gaze as Evidence for Common Grounding: A Cross-Corpus Analysis of MapTask and MUNDEX
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
arXiv:2606. 31719v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In collaborative dialogue, shared perception does not guarantee shared interpretation.
arXiv:2609.14207v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We propose to finetune vision-language models to generate more pragmatically optimal referring expressions by transforming observations of incremental...
The study compares human and vision‑language model (VLM) responses to cross‑modal association tasks, using identical stimuli (a pseudo‑word and two images) and recording both choices and eye movements. While larger VLMs show some alignment with human choices, their attention patterns correlate poorly with human gaze, performing no better than a simple center‑bias baseline. Fine‑tuning VLMs on human choices improves choice alignment but not attention alignment, and training on human gaze improves attention correlation without affecting choice accuracy.
The study examines how reader proficiency influences the relationship between layer-wise surprisal from large language models (LLMs) and eye-tracking gaze measures. Using the MECO L2 corpus, researchers compared high- and low-proficiency readers on first-pass gaze duration (FPGD) and total gaze duration (TGD), finding that lower-proficiency readers exhibit deeper Predictive Depth for FPGD, while TGD shows deeper Predictive Depth across both groups. The results suggest that the distribution of predictive power across LLM layers relates to the timing and breadth of reading processes and varies with reader proficiency.
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.
arXiv:2608. 16514v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Human visual search is serial: the fovea must land on a candidate to confirm it, and those landings form a scanpath.