SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Troy M. Bouman

Publications and source records attributed to Troy M. Bouman.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Determining Which Sine Wave Frequencies Correspond to Signal and Which Correspond to Noise in Eye-Tracking Time-Series

The Fourier theorem states that any time-series can be decomposed into a set of sinusoidal frequencies, each with its own phase and amplitude. The literature suggests that some frequencies are important to reproduce key qualities of eye-movements ("signal") and some of frequencies are not important ("noise"). To investigate what is signal and what is noise, we analyzed our dataset in three ways: (1) visual inspection of plots of saccade, microsaccade and smooth pursuit exemplars; (2) analysis of the percentage of variance accounted for (PVAF) in 1,033 unfiltered saccade trajectories by each frequency band; (3) analyzing the main sequence relationship between saccade peak velocity and amplitude, based on a power law fit. Visual inspection suggested that frequencies up to 75 Hz are required to represent microsaccades. Our PVAF analysis indicated that signals in the 0-25 Hz band account for nearly 100% of the variance in saccade trajectories. Power law coefficients (a, b) return to unfiltered levels for signals low-pass filtered at 75 Hz or higher. We conclude that to maintain eye movement signal and reduce noise, a cutoff frequency of 75 Hz is appropriate. We explain why, given this finding, a minimum sampling rate of 750 Hz is suggested.

cs.HC

Filtering Eye-Tracking Data From an EyeLink 1000: Comparing Heuristic, Savitzky-Golay, IIR and FIR Digital Filters

In a previous report (Raju et al.,2023) we concluded that, if the goal was to preserve events such as saccades, microsaccades, and smooth pursuit in eye-tracking recordings, data with sine wave frequencies less than 100 Hz (-3db) were the signal and data above 100 Hz were noise. We compare 5 filters in their ability to preserve signal and remove noise. Specifically, we compared the proprietary STD and EXTRA heuristic filters provided by our EyeLink 1000 (SR-Research, Ottawa, Canada), a Savitzky-Golay (SG) filter, an infinite impulse response (IIR) filter (low-pass Butterworth), and a finite impulse filter (FIR). For each of the non-heuristic filters, we systematically searched for optimal parameters. Both the IIR and the FIR filters were zero-phase filters. Mean frequency response profiles and amplitude spectra for all 5 filters are provided. In addition, we examined the effect of our filters on a noisy recording. Our FIR filter had the sharpest roll-off of any filter. Therefore, it maintained the signal and removed noise more effectively than any other filter. On this basis, we recommend the use of our FIR filter. Several reports have shown that filtering increased the temporal autocorrelation of a signal. To address this, the present filters were also evaluated in terms of autocorrelation (specifically the first 3 lags). Of all our filters, the STD filter introduced the least amount of autocorrelation.

cs.HC

Analysis of Heuristic and Digital Filters as Applied to Video-oculography Signals

In 1993, Stampe [1993] suggested two "heurisitic" filters that were designed for video-oculography data. Several manufacturers (e.g., SR-Research, Tobii T60 XL and SMI) have employed these filters as an option for recording eye-movements. For the EyeLink family of eye-trackers, these two filters are referred to as standard (STD) or EXTRA. We have implemented these filters as software functions. For those who use their eye-trackers for data-collection only, this will allow users to collect unfiltered data and simultaneously have access to unfiltered, STD filtered and EXTRA filtered data for the exact same recording. Based on the literature, which has employed various eye-tracking technologies, and our analysis of our EyeLink-1000 data, we conclude that the highest signal frequency content needed for most eye-tracking studies (i.e., saccades, microsaccades and smooth pursuit) is around 100 Hz, excluding fixation microtremor. For those who collect their data at 1000 Hz or higher, we test two zero-phase low-pass digital filters, one with a cutoff of 50 Hz and one with a cutoff of 100 Hz. We perform a Fourier (FFT) analysis to examine the frequency content for unfiltered data, STD data, EXTRA filtered data, and data filtered by low-pass digital filters. We also examine the frequency response of these filters. The digital filter with the 100 Hz cutoff dramatically outperforms both heuristic filters because the heuristic filters leave noise above 100 Hz. In the paper we provide additional conclusions and suggest the use of digital filters in scenarios where offline data processing is an option.

cs.HC