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.
KeywordsGaze-contingent display Artificial scotoma Scotoma simulation Eye tracking Eye movements
This research was supported by National Eye Institute Grant No. R01EY019100, awarded to R.L.W.
- Dorr, M., & Bex, P. J. (2011). A gaze-contingent display to study contrast sensitivity under natural viewing conditions. Paper presented at the SPIE, Human Vision and Electronic Imaging XVI, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
- Loschky, L. C., & McConkie, G. W. (2000). User performance with gaze contingent multiresolutional displays. Proceedings of the 2000 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications (pp. 97–103). Palm Beach Gardens, FL: ACM. doi: 10.1145/355017.355032
- Loschky, L. C., Sethi, A., Simons, D. J., Pydimarri, T. N., Ochs, D., & Corbeille, J. L. (2007a). The importance of information localization in scene gist recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1431–1450. doi: 10.1037/0096-1518.104.22.1681 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Loschky, L. C., & Wolverton, G. S. (2007). How late can you update gaze-contingent multiresolutional displays without detection? ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMCCAP), 3, 1–10. doi: 10.1145/1314303.1314310
- O’Sullivan, C., Dingliana, J., & Howlett, S. (2002). Eye movements and interactive graphics. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 555–572). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Shah, A. (2012). VGA, DVI Display Interfaces to Bow out in Five Years. PC World. Retrieved from www.pcworld.com/article/248421/vga_dvi_display_interfaces_to_bow_out_in_five_years.html
- SR Research Ltd. (2013). Gaze contingent and gaze control paradigms [Web page]. Retrieved from http://eyelinkinfo.com/solutions_gaz_con.html
- Triesch, J., Sullivan, B. T., Hayhoe, M. M., & Ballard, D. H. (2002). Saccade contingent updating in virtual reality. In Proceedings of the Eye Tracking Research and Applications Symposium 2002 (pp. 95–102). New York, NY: ACM. doi: 10.1145/507072.507092
- van Diepen, P. M. J., De Graef, P., & d’Ydewalle, G. (1995). Chronometry of foveal information extraction during scene perception. In Studies in visual information processing (Vol. 6, pp. 349–362). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland. doi: 10.1016/S0926-907X(05)80030-3