Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Distinguishing Target and Non-Target Fixations with EEG and Eye Tracking in Realistic Visual Scenes

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2508.01853 v1 pith:546K3AMJ submitted 2025-08-03 cs.CV cs.HC

Distinguishing Target and Non-Target Fixations with EEG and Eye Tracking in Realistic Visual Scenes

classification cs.CV cs.HC
keywords visualfixationsnon-targetrealisticsearchtargetapproachscenarios
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Distinguishing target from non-target fixations during visual search is a fundamental building block to understand users' intended actions and to build effective assistance systems. While prior research indicated the feasibility of classifying target vs. non-target fixations based on eye tracking and electroencephalography (EEG) data, these studies were conducted with explicitly instructed search trajectories, abstract visual stimuli, and disregarded any scene context. This is in stark contrast with the fact that human visual search is largely driven by scene characteristics and raises questions regarding generalizability to more realistic scenarios. To close this gap, we, for the first time, investigate the classification of target vs. non-target fixations during free visual search in realistic scenes. In particular, we conducted a 36-participants user study using a large variety of 140 realistic visual search scenes in two highly relevant application scenarios: searching for icons on desktop backgrounds and finding tools in a cluttered workshop. Our approach based on gaze and EEG features outperforms the previous state-of-the-art approach based on a combination of fixation duration and saccade-related potentials. We perform extensive evaluations to assess the generalizability of our approach across scene types. Our approach significantly advances the ability to distinguish between target and non-target fixations in realistic scenarios, achieving 83.6% accuracy in cross-user evaluations. This substantially outperforms previous methods based on saccade-related potentials, which reached only 56.9% accuracy.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.