ArticleJournal of eye movement research2022
A systematic performance comparison of two Smooth Pursuit detection algorithms in Virtual Reality depending on target number, distance, and movement patterns.
Article in Journal of eye movement research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Introduction to the Special Thematic Issue "Virtual Reality and Eye Tracking".Journal of eye movement research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared the performance of two smooth-pursuit-based object selection algorithms in Virtual Reality (VR). To assess the best algorithm for a range of configurations, we systematically varied the number of targets to choose from, their distance, and their movement pattern (linear and circular). Performance was operationalized as the ratio of hits, misses and non-detections. Averaged over all distances, the correlation-based algorithm performed better for circular movement patterns compared to linear ones (F(1,11) = 24.27, p < .001, η² = .29). This was not found for the difference-based algorithm (F(1,11) = 0.98, p = .344, η² = .01). Both algorithms performed better in close distances compared to larger ones (F(1,11) = 190.77, p < .001, η² = .75 correlation-based, and F(1,11) = 148.20, p < .001, η² = .42, difference-based). An interaction effect for distance x movement emerged. After systematically varying the number of targets, these results could be replicated, with a slightly smaller effect. Based on performance levels, we introduce the concept of an optimal threshold algorithm, suggesting the best detection algorithm for the individual target configuration. Learnings of adding the third dimension to the detection algorithms and the role of distractors are discussed and suggestions for future research added.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.