Home › Forums › Eye Tracking Devices › EyeX controller accurary and precision test report
Tagged: accuracy, eyex controller, precision
- This topic has 9 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 1 month ago by Olivier.
- 24/04/2014 at 10:04 #723Benjamin AdamsParticipant
Hello Tobii crew,
i’m looking for an accurary and precision test report for the new EyeX controller, like that one you offer in your library for T60 or TX120 and some others. If there is no Report, which Eye Tracker Device is compareable to the EyeX controller?
Thx.25/04/2014 at 09:10 #726AndersParticipant
I’m sorry but there is no accuracy and precision report for the EyeX Controller yet.
The EyeX controller doesn’t compare directly to any Tobii eye tracker because the technology is slightly different and it’s not designed for pure analytical uses.
From what we have seen so far, the accuracy is comparable to the other Tobii trackers, but the precision is not as good.27/04/2014 at 19:55 #729Benjamin AdamsParticipant
Thanks for the answer. Is it possible to give me value of the loss of precision?
If i need one specification as compensation for the EyeX Controller, which would be the most identical?28/04/2014 at 15:32 #730Robert [Tobii]Participant
As Anders said we haven’t done any exact measurements yet. Comparing the EyeX Controller, an eye tracker for consumer use, with the Tobii T/X-series eye trackers, for research use, does not make sense since they have been designed for different purposes.10/03/2015 at 08:54 #2691OlivierParticipant
This is an interesting question, I also would like to know about the precision of the EyeX. There are still no report?
As a researcher, I chose EyeX to do research because it can be easily disseminate to a wider audience.06/05/2015 at 00:08 #2935Tim TregubovParticipant
Same question here! We’re doing research and developing an interactive graphic novel and would be great to be able to cite some numbers, since the application is for public use we chose the eyeX as it is more accessible but we want to be able to talk about specific precisions too!13/05/2015 at 23:50 #2971antoine amanieuxParticipant
same question – it is as if you are selling a car without giving info on max speed and mpg this does not make any sense !08/06/2015 at 12:26 #3075Jenny [Tobii]Participant
We do not yet have a good way of measuring accuracy for day-to-day eye-gaze interaction. One of my collegues have summerized the current situation like this:
The current industry standard for measuring performance of eye trackers comes from research environments where eye trackers have historically been most common. Metrics are typically made in controlled enviornments where the light conditions do not change, measurements are made very soon after calibration, and the user typically does not move very much. Presenting such metrics for a dev kit intended for day to day consumer usage, gaming etc can easily be misleading, so we have chosen not to measure our eye trackers intended for consumer usage in this way.
We are actively exploring how to best measure eye trackers intended for consumer usage, and intend in the future to provide more relevant metrics on the performance of our consumer eyetrackers.17/02/2016 at 16:15 #4465Jenny [Tobii]Participant
To clarify: Our consumer eye trackers are not meant to be used for research. Neither are they meant to replace the mouse, since eye tracking can never be pixel perfect (partly because of biological limitations with the eye). Giving standard numbers for precision and accuracy encourages people to focus on pointing precision and comparing the eye tracker to a mouse pointer instead of embracing eye tracking for its own merits and creating a great user experience where eye tracking is one of a set of input devices used in combination. For example, in a game, the eye tracker can be used to control the camera rotation separately from the game character’s rotation. So, you can have your character move in one direction and at the same time be free to look out for enemies to the left and right.22/02/2016 at 03:44 #4506OlivierParticipant
Many devices are not design for research but still we use them for Quantified Self, Ubiquitous computing, HCi… Of course it’s not pixel perfect, but who care? Even the “professional” eye trackers are not pixel perfect. In some application case, EyeX can replace the mouse. Controlling the camera view by the eye gaze is exactly this principle!
My university bough around 20 EyeX used for research about education. We can’t do that with 10 or 100 times more expensive eye tracker. If our research about education application succeed, many family can afford to buy one EyeX to help their children to learn in a better way.
Tobii started a new revolution about eye tracking by proposing the EyeX model few years ago for gaming, but it’s really strange to not encourage researcher to use it for other applications… It can have only a positive impact on the company. Actually, I just discovered the research of Tim Tregubov because of his post, and it’s really great: changing the story of a graphical novel based on the eye gaze! It sounds so exiting, don’t you think?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.