Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 61 references

Contact Lens with Moir\'e patterns for High-Precision Eye Tracking

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A passive label inside a contact lens encodes viewing angle in moiré-fringe shifts, recovering lens orientation with 0.28° accuracy from one photograph.

desk verdict A credible bench demonstration of a passive moiré-parallax contact-lens label for eye tracking; the 0.28° precision is a calibration residual and the unquantified angular-gradient bias likely makes it optimistic, but the core idea is sound and worth a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.05147 v1 pith:56KWLNS6 submitted 2025-05-08 physics.optics

I.M. Fradkin , R.V. Kirtaev , M.S. Mironov , D.V. Grudinin , A.A. Marchenko , M.M. Chugunova , V.R. Solovei , A.V. Syuy
show 4 more authors
A.A. Vyshnevyy I.P. Radko A.V. Arsenin V.S. Volkov
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords eyetrackingcontactlensmoirépatternparallaxaugmentedrealityvirtualangularmeasurementFourierphase
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes and tests a contact-lens eye-tracking label that works without infrared light, scale bars, colour bars, or perspective correction. The label is a passive stack of two gratings with slightly different periods; the gap between them creates parallax, so tilting the lens shifts the visible moiré fringes. Measuring the relative shift of four moiré patterns in a single photograph recovers the lens orientation, and the authors report an angular error of 0.28° after averaging four pattern pairs and better than 0.2° near the centre of the range. If this holds, AR/VR systems could track gaze and lens rotation with an ordinary camera and a cheap passive in-lens label, with the same platform offering a path to much finer precision.

What carries the argument

The central object is a bilayer grating stack with a deliberate period mismatch: a reference grating of period $p_A=31.6\,\mu\mathrm{m}$ and a top grating divided into four zones with periods 29.7, 30.7, 32.5, and 33.5 $\mu\mathrm{m}$, separated by a gap $H\approx250\,\mu\mathrm{m}$. When the stack is viewed at an angle, the parallax between the two gratings shifts the moiré fringes; the operative quantity is the relative shift of two oppositely moving patterns $\tilde{x}_4-\tilde{x}_1$ normalized by the sum of their periods $a_1+a_4$. That normalized-relative-shift construction is what decouples the measurement from illumination, magnification, and perspective, and the four-zone design supplies four independent estimates whose average reduces the error from 0.41° to 0.28°.

What would settle it

Compare angles recovered from moiré phase with the rotation stage while changing only the camera distance, say from 40 cm to 10 cm; if the recovered angle drifts at fixed stage angle, the label's finite angular size is biasing the phase. A more direct check is to crop the left and right halves of the label and compute their Fourier phases separately: if their implied angles differ by about the label's angular width, the zero-angular-size assumption is violated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that the viewing angle of a contact-lens label can be recovered from the relative phase of moiré patterns rather than from any absolute feature. In the label, a reference grating of period $p_A=31.6\,\mu\mathrm{m}$ is stacked with a top grating subdivided into four zones with periods 29.7, 30.7, 32.5, and 33.5 $\mu\mathrm{m}$, separated by $H\approx250\,\mu\mathrm{m}$. The resulting fringes have period $a_x=p_Ap_B/|p_B-p_A|$ and shift with the internal angle, giving $\tan\Theta_{\mathrm{lens}}=\frac{p_A}{H}\frac{\tilde{x}_4-\tilde{x}_1}{a_1+a_4}+C$, where the constant absorbs fixed phase offsets. Because the angle depends on a dimensionless ratio of shift to fringe period, the readout is invariant under image scaling, label position, and mild perspective distortion. The paper reports that over a ±15° rotation range imaged at 40 cm, a single pair yields 0.41° RMS error, averaging the four opposite-shifting pairs gives 0.28°, and the central ±10° region gives about 0.2°.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the whole label is seen from one viewing angle; in the experiment a label a few millimetres wide at 40 cm spans about a degree of viewing angle, so points across it are actually viewed at slightly different angles, and the paper does not quantify how much this spreads the measured fringe phase.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Averaging the four opposite-shifting moiré pairs gives an angular error of 0.28°, and about 0.2° within ±10° of the range centre, which the paper states is sufficient for typical AR/VR gaze detection.
  • Because the angle is read as a dimensionless ratio of fringe shift to fringe period, the same algorithm works without scale bars, colour bars, or corrections for image perspective or magnification.
  • Phase-based readout makes the measurement insensitive to ambient lighting and camera exposure, removing the infrared illumination normally needed for video oculography.
  • The label is passive and read by an ordinary camera, so continuous eye tracking adds little power and no extra hardware to an AR/VR device that already has a camera.
  • Reducing the grating periods shrinks the angular period and therefore multiplies sensitivity; the paper estimates this could improve precision by more than an order of magnitude.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: if the finite-angular-size bias identified in the paper is suppressed, the same scheme should reach well below 0.1°, moving it closer to the precision of scleral search coils without their invasiveness.
  • Editorial inference: the relative-phase readout is not inherently limited to rotation; translational slip of the lens along the eye also changes the parallax projection, so a label with more than four zones could separate rotation from translation in one image.
  • Editorial inference: the pairwise analysis is forced by uncontrolled random phases between grating zones; a fabrication process that fixes those phases would allow one global fit over all zones, improving noise averaging beyond simply averaging independent pairs.
  • Editorial inference: the multiple period mismatches form a Vernier scale; combining zones with different angular periods could yield an absolute, not merely incremental, angle encoder over a range larger than the single-pattern angular period.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a passive optical eye-tracking label for contact lenses, consisting of two superimposed gratings with a slight period mismatch. The observation angle is encoded in the parallax-induced relative shift of the moiré fringes, as described by Eq. (2). The authors fabricate a PDMS contact lens with four moiré patterns, image it from ~40 cm on a rotation stage, and extract fringe shifts and periods by Fourier analysis. They report an averaged RMS deviation of 0.28° between true and estimated angles and claim an angular resolution better than 0.3°, with potential for further improvement, targeting AR/VR eye-tracking applications.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the method offers a simple, passive, illumination-independent alternative to camera-based eye tracking that avoids infrared illumination, scale bars, and perspective correction. The theoretical derivation in Supplementary Note 1 is clear, and the experimental realization involving a laser-engraved bilayer grating in a contact lens is a substantial technical effort. The multi-pattern differential design is a sensible way to remove common-mode errors. However, the precision claim is currently supported only by an in-sample calibration residual, and the zero-angular-size approximation is violated at the experimental distance in a way that is acknowledged but not quantified. The approach is promising, but the metrological validation needs strengthening.

major comments (3)
  1. [Angle measurements and precision estimation (Fig. 4)] The reported σ_Θ = 0.28° is the root-mean-square deviation of the 31 measured angles from a linear fit performed on the same 31 data points, and the gap H is estimated from the slope of that same fit. This makes the reported error an in-sample calibration residual rather than a prediction error on independent angles. To substantiate the claimed 0.3° precision, the authors should validate with a held-out procedure (e.g., fit on one half of the angular range and test on the other) or use an independently measured H and phase offsets, and report the resulting out-of-sample error.
  2. [Label operating principle; Supplementary Note 1] The zero-angular-size approximation is explicitly assumed in Note 1 ('all its parts are viewed at the same angle'), but at the experimental distance of 40 cm, a label a few millimeters wide subtends approximately 0.5°–1°, i.e., the same order as the claimed 0.28° error. The authors acknowledge the gradient issue in 'Label operating principle' and list 'accounting for moiré pattern gradients' as future work, but they do not quantify its effect on the Fourier-extracted phase or on the normalized shift in Eq. (2). Because the four subgratings have different periods, a linear gradient in tan Θ across the label does not cancel in (x4-x1)/(a1+a4); a rough estimate for H = 250 μm, p_A = 31.6 μm, and a 1° angular span gives a bias of order 0.2°–0.3°, comparable to the reported precision. This systematic effect must be quantified or removed before the 0.28° figure can be accepted as the method's precision.
  3. [Discussion; Measurements] The experimental demonstration is performed at a camera distance of ~40 cm, while the claimed AR/VR applicability would place the observation camera much closer to the eye (centimeter scale). At such distances, the angular gradient across the label is several times larger, further violating the zero-angular-size approximation and the paraxial linear model. No experiment, simulation, or error analysis is provided at AR/VR-relevant distances, so the statement that the method 'meets typical AR/VR application requirements' is not supported by the presented data.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (2) vs Supplementary Note 1] Eq. (2) uses p_B in the prefactor, while the derivation in Note 1, Eq. (S4), gives p_A. Since p_A and p_B differ by up to 6%, the notation should be made consistent or the approximation stated.
  2. [Abstract and Discussion] The abstract states 'angular resolution exceeding 0.3°', while the Discussion says 'angular precision better than 0.3°'. Resolution, accuracy, and precision are distinct terms; the manuscript should use them consistently.
  3. [Results, precision paragraph] The text states the error is 'approximately 1/25 of the label's angular period' in one place and '1/37' in the Discussion; these values should be reconciled.
  4. [Results, last paragraph before Fig. 4] The sentence 'even if the image of the label is distorted due to large viewing angles or some optical aberrations these distortions to find the normalized relative shift between gratings' is incomplete and should be rewritten.
  5. [Materials and Methods, Fabrication] The fabricated stack is described as 400-µm-thick PDMS, but the inferred optical gap is H ≈ 250 μm. The relationship between the physical stack thickness, the ink layers, and the effective optical gap should be clarified, since H is a key parameter in Eq. (2).
  6. [Fig. 4d] The claim of 'enhanced precision of approximately 0.2° or better for a narrow angle range' is not quantified; please specify the angle range and the method used to derive this value.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Reported 0.28°/0.41° precision is the in-sample residual of the calibration fit; the moiré-angle derivation itself is self-contained and not definitionally circular.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 'Angle measurements and precision estimation'; Eq. (2) calibration and Fig. 4a-c; Supplementary Note 3]
    "We evaluate the measurement error, σΘ41 = 0.41°, as the root mean square deviation of the true viewing angle Ωtrue from the values predicted by linear fit Ω41est."

    The 0.41° and later 0.28° values are computed as the RMS deviation between the stage angle and the angle produced by the same linear fit that was used to calibrate the shift-to-angle mapping of Eq. (2) on the same 31 images. The physical gap H is also read off from that fit's slope. Thus the reported 'prediction' is an in-sample residual, not an independent held-out test: the fit is used to generate the angles it was fitted to reproduce, so the error estimate is statistically tied to the calibration rather than measuring true prediction error on unseen orientations. This is a mild self-reference in the precision claim, not a definitional equivalence of the core moiré-phase derivation.

full rationale

The core derivation is self-contained: Supplementary Note 1 multiplies two harmonic grating transparencies, obtains the moiré term, and solves for tan Θ_lens in terms of the normalized relative shift (Eqs. S1-S5 and Eq. (2)). No step in that derivation uses the experimental result as an input, and the only load-bearing external input is the rotation-stage ground truth, which is independent of the model. The self-citations (refs. 45-46, 58) are patent/camera-context citations and do not carry the argument. The finite-angular-size gradient noted in 'Label operating principle' is a real but unquantified correctness risk, not a circularity; the paper explicitly lists 'accounting for moiré pattern gradients' as future work. The one mild circularity is the precision estimate: the reported 0.28°/0.41° error is the RMS residual of the calibration line fit to the same data, so it is an in-sample measure rather than an out-of-sample prediction. This does not undermine the central demonstration because the linear dependence itself is nontrivial and externally grounded by the motorized stage.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central measurement relies on a small set of calibration parameters and well-known physics. The main free parameters are the inferred gap H and the phase offset C. The key modeling axioms are sinusoidal grating approximation, paraxial angles, uniform observation angle across each pattern, and a flat refraction surface. The paper does not introduce new physical entities. The curved lens surface and angular gradient across the label are the least-tested assumptions.

free parameters (2)
  • H (gap between gratings) = ~250 µm
    Inferred from the slope of the linear fit to measured moiré shift versus rotation angle (Fig. 4a). The paper says the gap is difficult to control and was 'reliably determined from calibration'.
  • C (phase offset constant in Eq. 2) = not reported (calibration offset)
    Constant in Eq. (2) set by microscopic grating phases; it is fitted by the linear calibration and cancels when only relative angle changes are reported.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Grating transmittance can be modeled as sinusoidal rather than square-wave
    Used in SI Note 1 (Eq. S1) to derive moiré phase; period and phase claims hold, but fringe shape is approximated.
  • domain assumption Paraxial approximation tan Θ_lens ≈ Θ / n_lens for angles within ±15°
    Used after Eq. (2) in the main text to linearize the calibration and relate air angle to lens-internal angle.
  • domain assumption Zero-angular-size approximation for each moiré pattern
    Assumed when extracting a single Fourier phase per pattern; the paper itself flags transmission gradients across the label in the results section.
  • domain assumption Flat PDMS/air interface for Snell's law
    Equation (2) in the main text relates air angle and lens-internal angle using a single Snell law; the actual label sits in a curved contact lens, so the surface normal varies spatially.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Contact Lens with Moir\'e patterns for High-Precision Eye Tracking." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/56KWLNS6

@misc{pith2026250505147,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Contact Lens with Moir\'e patterns for High-Precision Eye Tracking},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/56KWLNS6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.05147}
}
read the original abstract

Eye tracking is a key technology for human-computer interaction, particularly crucial in augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) systems. We propose a novel eye-tracking approach based on incorporating passive eye-tracking modules into contact lenses. These modules comprise two superimposed gratings separated by a narrow gap. The overlapped gratings produce moir\'e pattern, while the spatial separation between them results in parallax effect, namely, pattern transformation upon variations in viewing angle, which enables accurate angular measurements. This method is insensitive to ambient lighting conditions and requires neither scale and color bars nor perspective corrections. Using this approach, we have experimentally measured lens orientation with angular resolution exceeding 0.3{\deg}, which is satisfactory for gaze detection in most AR/VR applications. Furthermore, the proposed technological platform holds a potential for many-fold enhancement in measurement precision.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.05147 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. a Contact lens with an integrated eye-tracking label, observed using an external camera module to measure lens orientation. b Contact lens with the eye-tracking label cross￾section illustrating the camera observation angle relative to the label normal (Θ) and relative to the lens axis (Ω). c (i-iii) Schematics of the parallax effect in a stack of two identical gratings. Ω a x x x Θ Θ x θ a θ a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. a Photograph of a contact lens with an integrated eye-tracking label placed atop of an eye model. b Contact lens with a label comprising four elements exhibiting distinct moiré patterns explored in the article. Inset: Schematics of the contact lens cross-section showing the eye-tracking label, where top grating B is separated from bottom grating A by a distance 𝐻𝐻 ≈ p p p p p [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Schematics of the experimental setup. The contact lens is mounted on a rotation stage (±15° range) and imaged by a digital camera at ~40 cm distance under external illumination. Author Contributions R.V.K. and M.S.M fabricated samples; A.A.M. and R.V.K. provided the measurements; I.M.F and D.V.G. performed data processing; I.M.F, I.P.R and A.A.V. prepared draft of the manuscript; M.M.C. and A.V.S. provided patent/li… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    MIT Press https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262580106/the-psychology-and-pedagogy-of-reading/

    The Psychology and Pedagogy of Reading. MIT Press https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262580106/the-psychology-and-pedagogy-of-reading/

    arXiv

  2. [2]

    Oyama, A. et al. Novel Method for Rapid Assessment of Cognitive Impairment Using High- Performance Eye-Tracking Technology. Sci. Rep. 9, 12932 (2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Karargyris, A. et al. Creation and validation of a chest X -ray dataset with eye- tracking and report dictation for AI development. Sci. Data 8, 92 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Anderson, T. J. & MacAskill, M. R. Eye movements in patients with neurodegenerative disorders. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 9, 74–85 (2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    Lazarov, A. et al. Attention to threat in posttraumatic stress disorder as indexed by eye - tracking indices: a systematic review. Psychol. Med. 49, 705–726 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Stember, J. N. et al. Eye Tracking for Deep Learning Segmentation Using Convolutional Neural Networks. J. Digit. Imaging 32, 597–604 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    & Szyszka, A

    Białowąs, S. & Szyszka, A. Eye -tracking in Marketing Research. in Managing Economic Innovations – Methods and Instruments (ed. Romanowski, R.) 91–104 (Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 2019). doi:10.12657/9788379862771-6

    work page doi:10.12657/9788379862771-6 2019

  8. [8]

    Malhotra, N. K. Review of Marketing Research: Volume 4 . (Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, 2008)

    work page 2008

Show all 61 references
  1. [9]

    Xu, J., Min, J. & Hu, J. Real -time eye tracking for the assessment of driver fatigue. Healthc. Technol. Lett. 5, 54–58 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    G., Bozomitu, R

    Lupu, R. G., Bozomitu, R. G., Păsărică, A. & Rotariu, C. Eye tracking user interface for Internet access used in assistive technology. in 2017 E-Health and Bioengineering Conference (EHB) 659–662 (2017). doi:10.1109/EHB.2017.7995510

    2017

  3. [11]

    Gaze Interaction and Applications of Eye Tracking: Advances in Assistive Technologies: Advances in Assistive Technologies

    Päivi, M. Gaze Interaction and Applications of Eye Tracking: Advances in Assistive Technologies: Advances in Assistive Technologies. (IGI Global, 2011)

    2011

  4. [12]

    B., MacNeilage, P

    Adhanom, I. B., MacNeilage, P. & Folmer, E. Eye Tracking in Virtual Reality: a Broad Review of Applications and Challenges. Virtual Real. 27, 1481–1505 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    Valliappan, N. et al. Accelerating eye movement research via accurate and affordable smartphone eye tracking. Nat. Commun. 11, 4553 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Song, J.-H., van de Groep, J., Kim, S. J. & Brongersma, M. L. Non- local metasurfaces for spectrally decoupled wavefront manipulation and eye tracking. Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 1224– 1230 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    Mercier, G. et al. Semitransparent Image Sensors for Eye -Tracking Applications. ACS Photonics 10, 2994–3000 (2023)

    2023

  8. [16]

    Shi, Y. et al. Eye tracking and eye expression decoding based on transparent, flexible and ultra-persistent electrostatic interface. Nat. Commun. 14, 3315 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Sheehy, C. K. et al. High-speed, image- based eye tracking with a scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Biomed. Opt. Express 3, 2611–2622 (2012)

    2012

  10. [18]

    Kim, N. -I. et al. Highly-Sensitive Skin -Attachable Eye- Movement Sensor Using Flexible Nonhazardous Piezoelectric Thin Film. Adv. Funct. Mater. 31, 2008242 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Li, K. et al. GazeTrak: Exploring Acoustic -based Eye Tracking on a Glass Frame. in Proceedings of the 30th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking 497–512 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2024). doi:10.1145/3636534.3649376

    2024

  12. [20]

    & Yuce, M

    Vera Anaya, D., He, T., Lee, C. & Yuce, M. R. Self -powered eye motion sensor based on triboelectric interaction and near -field electrostatic induction for wearable assistive technologies. Nano Energy 72, 104675 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    Zhu, J. et al. Triboelectric Patch Based on Maxwell Displacement Current for Human Energy Harvesting and Eye Movement Monitoring. ACS Nano 16, 11884–11891 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    & Müller, H

    Cognolato, M., Atzori, M. & Müller, H. Head- mounted eye gaze tracking devices: An overview of modern devices and recent advances. J. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. Eng. 5, 2055668318773991 (2018)

    2018

  15. [23]

    & Ying, H

    Jian-nan, C., Peng- yi, Z., Si -yi, Z., Chuang, Z. & Ying, H. Key Techniques of Eye Gaze Tracking Based on Pupil Corneal Reflection. in 2009 WRI Global Congress on Intelligent Systems vol. 2 133–138 (2009)

    2009

  16. [24]

    & Fukumoto, K

    Ebisawa, Y. & Fukumoto, K. Head-Free, Remote Eye-Gaze Detection System Based on Pupil- Corneal Reflection Method With Easy Calibration Using Two Stereo -Calibrated Video Cameras. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 60, 2952–2960 (2013)

    2013

  17. [25]

    Holmqvist, K. et al. Eye Tracking: A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures. (OUP Oxford, 2011)

    2011

  18. [26]

    & Willomitzer, F

    Wang, J., Wang, T., Xu, B., Cossairt, O. & Willomitzer, F. Accurate Eye Tracking from Dense 3D Surface Reconstructions using Single -Shot Deflectometry. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.07298 (2024)

    2024 doi arXiv

  19. [27]

    & Willomitzer, F

    Choi, J., Wang, J., Wang, T. & Willomitzer, F. Accurate Eye -Tracking from Deflectometric Information using Deep Learning. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1364/opticaopen.25199411.v3 (2024)

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    & Willomitzer, F

    Wang, T., Wang, J., Matsuda, N., Cossairt, O. & Willomitzer, F. Differentiable Deflectometric Eye Tracking. IEEE Trans. Comput. Imaging 10, 888–898 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Chen, G.-Z., Chan, I.-S., Leung, L. K. K. & Lam, D. C. C. Soft wearable contact lens sensor for continuous intraocular pressure monitoring. Med. Eng. Phys. 36, 1134–1139 (2014)

    2014

  22. [30]

    Mansouri, K., Weinreb, R. N. & Liu, J. H. K. Efficacy of a Contact Lens Sensor for Monitoring 24-H Intraocular Pressure Related Patterns. PLOS ONE 10, e0125530 (2015)

    2015

  23. [31]

    & Shaarawy, T

    Mansouri, K. & Shaarawy, T. Continuous intraocular pressure monitoring with a wireless ocular telemetry sensor: initial clinical experience in patients with open angle glaucoma. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 95, 627–629 (2011)

    2011

  24. [32]

    & Renaud, P

    Leonardi, M., Leuenberger, P., Bertrand, D., Bertsch, A. & Renaud, P. First Steps toward Noninvasive Intraocular Pressure Monitoring with a Sensing Contact Lens. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 45, 3113–3117 (2004)

    2004

  25. [33]

    & Park, J

    Maeng, B., Chang, H. & Park, J. Photonic crystal -based smart contact lens for continuous intraocular pressure monitoring. Lab. Chip 20, 1740–1750 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    C., Ho, C

    Lin, P. C., Ho, C. S., Wang, L. A., Wang, I. J. & Yen, J. Y. Intraocular Pressure Monitoring Using Moiré Patterns Generated from a Contact Lens. in (2017). doi:10.7567/SSDM.2014.D-7-4

    2017 doi

  27. [35]

    & Kim, J

    Lee, S.-H., Shin, K.-S., Kim, J.-W., Kang, J.-Y. & Kim, J. -K. Stimulus-Responsive Contact Lens for IOP Measurement or Temperature-Triggered Drug Release. Transl. Vis. Sci. Technol. 9, 1 (2020)

    2020

  28. [36]

    & Que, L

    Ding, X., Chen, M., Liang, X. & Que, L. Soft Contact Lens With Embedded Moiré Patterns - Based Intraocular Pressure Sensors. J. Microelectromechanical Syst. 31, 971–976 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    Zhang, W., Huang, L., Weinreb, R. N. & Cheng, H. Wearable electronic devices for glaucoma monitoring and therapy. Mater. Des. 212, 110183 (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    Zhu, H. et al. Hydrogel-Based Smart Contact Lens for Highly Sensitive Wireless Intraocular Pressure Monitoring. ACS Sens. 7, 3014–3022 (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    Kim, J. et al. Wearable smart sensor systems integrated on soft contact lenses for wireless ocular diagnostics. Nat. Commun. 8, 14997 (2017)

    2017

  32. [40]

    Kim, J. et al. A soft and transparent contact lens for the wireless quantitative monitoring of intraocular pressure. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 5, 772–782 (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    Zhang, J. et al. Smart soft contact lenses for continuous 24- hour monitoring of intraocular pressure in glaucoma care. Nat. Commun. 13, 5518 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    F., Kabilan, S

    Domschke, A., March, W. F., Kabilan, S. & Lowe, C. Initial clinical testing of a holographic non-invasive contact lens glucose sensor. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 8, 89–93 (2006)

    2006

  35. [43]

    S., de Ávila, B

    Kim, J., Campbell, A. S., de Ávila, B. E.- F. & Wang, J. Wearable biosensors for healthcare monitoring. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 389–406 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    Li, Z. et al. Power-Free Contact Lens for Glucose Sensing. Adv. Funct. Mater. 33, 2304647 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    V., Brunov, V

    Arsenin, A. V., Brunov, V. S., Volkov, V. S., Ermolaev, G. A. & Syuy, A. V. Contact Lens with a Gradient Optical System. (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    V., Brunov, V

    Arsenin, A. V., Brunov, V. S., Volkov, V. S., Kiselev, M. P. & Syuy, A. V. Virtual Image Visualization System. (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    & Park, J.-U

    Kim, J., Cha, E. & Park, J.-U. Recent Advances in Smart Contact Lenses. Adv. Mater. Technol. 5, 1900728 (2020)

    2020

  40. [48]

    Xia, Y. et al. State-of-the-Art in Smart Contact Lenses for Human–Machine Interaction. IEEE Trans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 53, 187–200 (2023)

    2023

  41. [49]

    Yao, G. et al. Snowflake-inspired and blink- driven flexible piezoelectric contact lenses for effective corneal injury repair. Nat. Commun. 14, 3604 (2023)

    2023

  42. [50]

    Zhu, H. et al. Frequency-encoded eye tracking smart contact lens for human –machine interaction. Nat. Commun. 15, 3588 (2024)

    2024

  43. [51]

    Robinson, D. A. A Method of Measuring Eye Movemnent Using a Scieral Search Coil in a Magnetic Field. IEEE Trans. Bio-Med. Electron. 10, 137–145 (1963)

    1963

  44. [52]

    Houben, M. M. J., Goumans, J. & van der Steen, J. Recording Three -Dimensional Eye Movements: Scleral Search Coils versus Video Oculography. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 47, 179–187 (2006)

    2006

  45. [53]

    Whitmire, E. et al. EyeContact: scleral coil eye tracking for virtual reality. in Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers 184–191 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2016). doi:10.1145/2971763.2971771

    2016

  46. [54]

    Massin, L. et al. Smart Contact Lens Applied to Gaze Tracking. IEEE Sens. J. 21, 455–463 (2021)

    2021

  47. [55]

    Massin, L. et al. Development of a new scleral contact lens with encapsulated photodetectors for eye tracking. Opt. Express 28, 28635–28647 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    & Wiemer, M

    Mirjalili, R., Czompo, J., Jia, J. & Wiemer, M. W. Contact lens-based eye tracking. (2019)

    2019

  49. [57]

    Mirjalili, R., Czompo, J., Owens, T. L. & Wiemer, M. W. Contact lens -based eye tracking using magnetic fields. (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    V., Volkov, V

    Arsenin, A. V., Volkov, V. S., Solovei, V. R., Syuy, A. V. & Fradkin, I. M. User’s Eye Tracking Method and Contact Lens. (2025)

    2025

  51. [59]

    Nichols, J. J. et al. The TFOS International Workshop on Contact Lens Discomfort: Executive Summary. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 54, TFOS7–TFOS13 (2013). Supplementary Information for Contact Lens with Moiré patterns for High-Precision Eye Tracking I.M. Fradkin1, R.V. Kirtae...

    2013

  52. [60]

    It is highly efficient approach due to 𝑂𝑂(𝑁𝑁 log 𝑁𝑁) complexity of Fourier transform

    Zero-padding: Extending the signal with null margins to artificially refine the FFT grid. It is highly efficient approach due to 𝑂𝑂(𝑁𝑁 log 𝑁𝑁) complexity of Fourier transform. Also it provides us the whole spectrum at once

  53. [61]

    Convolution: Convolving the discrete FFT spectrum with the continuous Fourier transform of a rectangular window �∝ sin 𝑘𝑘𝐷𝐷 𝑘𝑘𝐷𝐷 � allows us to obtain the same result as the first approach. Though computationally intensive � 𝑂𝑂(𝑁𝑁2)� for the whole spectrum computation, this me...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.