Pith. sign in

REVIEW

GazeXPErT: An Expert Eye-tracking Dataset for Interpretable and Explainable AI in Oncologic FDG-PET/CT Scans

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 2603.00162 v2 pith:AEZPESNX submitted 2026-02-26 eess.IV cs.CVcs.HC

classification eess.IVcs.CVcs.HC
keywords expertgazedatasetexpertseye-trackingfdg-petgazexpertdetection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a cornerstone imaging modality for guiding oncology therapies, yet human expert shortages necessitate more efficient diagnostic aids. While standalone AI models for automatic lesion detection exist, clinical translation remains hindered by AI explainability, reliability, and workflow integration. Meanwhile, human-computer-interaction in radiology remain limited to keyboard, mouse and voice, ignoring experts' faster, natural gaze signal. We present GazeXPErT, a 4D eye-tracking dataset with annotated expert decision windows for tumor detection and measurement on 346 dual-read FDG-PET/CTs. The dataset contributes 9,030 gaze-to-lesion trajectories derived from 3,948 minutes of 60 Hz eye-tracking data, rendered in COCO-style format. GazeXPErT captures experts' visual reasoning patterns when adjudicating suspicious lesions. It aims to facilitate development of trusted, explainable and interactive AI models through understanding expert gaze patterns. Baseline feasibility experiments suggest salient signal is extractable from routinely collected expert gaze (3D nnU-Net Dice: 0.6819 versus 0.6008 without), that gaze-trained vision transformers may aid dynamic lesion localization (74.95% predicted gaze closer to tumor), and that experts' intent may be predictable from raw gaze (Accuracy 67.53%, AUROC 0.747).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools