Direct measurement of the system latency of gaze-contingent displays

Gaze-contingent displays combine a display device with an eyetracking system to rapidly update an image on the basis of the measured eye position. All such systems have a delay, the system latency, between a change in gaze location and the related change in the display. The system latency is the result of the delays contributed by the eyetracker, the display computer, and the display, and it is affected by the properties of each component, which may include variability. We present a direct, simple, and low-cost method to measure the system latency. The technique uses a device to briefly blind the eyetracker system (e.g., for video-based eyetrackers, a device with infrared light-emitting diodes (LED)), creating an eyetracker event that triggers a change to the display monitor. The time between these two events, as captured by a relatively low-cost consumer camera with high-speed video capability (1,000 Hz), is an accurate measurement of the system latency. With multiple measurements, the distribution of system latencies can be characterized. The same approach can be used to synchronize the eye position time series and a video recording of the visual stimuli that would be displayed in a particular gaze-contingent experiment. We present system latency assessments for several popular types of displays and discuss what values are acceptable for different applications, as well as how system latencies might be improved.

[1]  Christopher J Bockisch,et al.  Different motor systems use similar damped extraretinal eye position information , 1999, Vision Research.

[2]  D. Burr,et al.  Selective suppression of the magnocellular visual pathway during saccadic eye movements , 1994, Nature.

[3]  K. Rayner.  Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[4]  George W. McConkie,et al.  Eye Movement Contingent Display Control: Personal Reflections and Comments. , 1997 .

[5]  Peng Wang,et al.  An LCD Monitor with Sufficiently Precise Timing for Research in Vision , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[6]  Peter Fransson,et al.  Keeping It Short , 2004, Psychological science.

[7]  Keith Rayner,et al.  The mask-onset delay paradigm and the availability of central and peripheral visual information during scene viewing. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[8]  J. Reynolds,et al.  Temporal Resolution for the Perception of Features and Conjunctions , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[9]  Jochen Triesch,et al.  Saccade contingent updating in virtual reality , 2002, ETRA.

[10]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  Gaze-Contingent Multiresolutional Displays: An Integrative Review , 2003, Hum. Factors.

[11]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  Investigating spatial vision and dynamic attentional selection using a gaze-contingent multiresolutional display. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[12]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  The importance of information localization in scene gist recognition. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Dave M. Stampe,et al.  Heuristic filtering and reliable calibration methods for video-based pupil-tracking systems , 1993 .

[14]  Rainer Herpers,et al.  Apparent motion during saccadic suppression periods , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[15]  Michael Dorr,et al.  A gaze-contingent display to study contrast sensitivity under natural viewing conditions , 2011, Electronic Imaging.

[16]  J. Henderson,et al.  Object identification without foveal vision: Evidence from an artificial scotoma paradigm , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  How late can you update gaze-contingent multiresolutional displays without detection? , 2007, TOMCCAP.

[18]  Frans W Cornelissen,et al.  The Eyelink Toolbox: Eye tracking with MATLAB and the Psychophysics Toolbox , 2002, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[19]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  Perception onset time during fixations in free viewing , 2002, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[20]  P M van Diepen,et al.  Brief foveal masking during scene perception. , 1999, Acta psychologica.

[21]  P. Perona,et al.  What do we perceive in a glance of a real-world scene? , 2007, Journal of vision.

[22]  John Dingliana,et al.  Eye movements and interactive graphics , 2003 .

[23]  G. d'Ydewalle,et al.  Chronometry of Foveal Information Extraction During Scene Perception , 1995 .

[24]  Heiner Deubel,et al.  The mind's eye : cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research , 2003 .

[25]  George W. McConkie,et al.  Evaluating and reporting data quality in eye movement research , 1980 .

[26]  S. Thorpe,et al.  The time course of visual processing: Backward masking and natural scene categorisation , 2005, Vision Research.

[27]  B. Krekelberg,et al.  An Equivalent Noise Investigation of Saccadic Suppression , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[28]  E M Fine,et al.  Effects of cataract and scotoma on visual acuity: a simulation study. , 1999, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[29]  Michelle R. Greene,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article The Briefest of Glances The Time Course of Natural Scene Understanding , 2022 .

[30]  Michele Rucci,et al.  EyeRIS: A general-purpose system for eye-movement-contingent display control , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[31]  J. Henderson,et al.  The influence of color on the perception of scene gist. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[32]  M. Morrone,et al.  Extraretinal Control of Saccadic Suppression , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[33]  D. Burr,et al.  Changes in visual perception at the time of saccades , 2001, Trends in Neurosciences.

[34]  Tobias Elze,et al.  Temporal Properties of Liquid Crystal Displays: Implications for Vision Science Experiments , 2012, PloS one.

[35]  S. Reder.  On-line monitoring of eye-position signals in contingent and noncontingent paradigms , 1973 .

[36]  Bart Krekelberg,et al.  An equivalent noise investigation of saccadic suppression , 2010 .

[37]  Jean-Baptiste Bernard,et al.  Page mode reading with simulated scotomas: A modest effect of interline spacing on reading speed , 2007, Vision Research.

[38]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[39]  Roger W. Li,et al.  Crowding between first- and second-order letter stimuli in normal foveal and peripheral vision. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[40]  David Zola,et al.  Instrumentation considerations in research involving eye-movement contingent stimulus control , 1984 .

[41]  Keith D. White,et al.  Contrast sensitivity during saccadic eye movements , 1978, Vision Research.

[42]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  User performance with gaze contingent multiresolutional displays , 2000, ETRA.

[43]  Eric Castet,et al.  Gaze-contingent simulation of retinopathy: Some potential pitfalls and remedies , 2011, Vision Research.

[44]  Jeffrey S. Perry,et al.  Visual search: the role of peripheral information measured using gaze-contingent displays. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[45]  Satoshi Shioiri,et al.  Postsaccadic processing of the retinal image during picture scanning , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[46]  Andrew T. Duchowski,et al.  Gaze-Contingent Displays: A Review , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..