Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze Position
Eccentric photorefractometry is widely used to measure eye refraction, accommodation, gaze position, and pupil size. While the individual calibration of refraction and accommodation data has been extensively studied, gaze measurements have received less attention. PowerRef 3 does not incorporate ind...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2024-12-01
|
| Series: | Sensors |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/24/24/8198 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1846102723006562304 |
|---|---|
| author | Linda Krauze Karola Panke Gunta Krumina Tatjana Pladere |
| author_facet | Linda Krauze Karola Panke Gunta Krumina Tatjana Pladere |
| author_sort | Linda Krauze |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Eccentric photorefractometry is widely used to measure eye refraction, accommodation, gaze position, and pupil size. While the individual calibration of refraction and accommodation data has been extensively studied, gaze measurements have received less attention. PowerRef 3 does not incorporate individual calibration for gaze measurements, resulting in a divergent offset between the measured and expected gaze positions. To address this, we proposed two methods to calculate the physiological vergence angle based on the visual vergence data obtained from PowerRef 3. Twenty-three participants aged 25 ± 4 years viewed Maltese cross stimuli at distances of 25, 30, 50, 70, and 600 cm. The expected vergence angles were calculated considering the individual interpupillary distance at far. Our results demonstrate that the PowerRef 3 gaze data deviated from the expected vergence angles by 9.64 ± 2.73° at 25 cm and 9.25 ± 3.52° at 6 m. The kappa angle calibration method reduced the discrepancy to 3.93 ± 1.19° at 25 cm and 3.70 ± 0.36° at 600 cm, whereas the linear regression method further improved the accuracy to 3.30 ± 0.86° at 25 cm and 0.26 ± 0.01° at 600 cm. Both methods improved the gaze results, with the linear regression calibration method showing greater overall accuracy. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-86f79d7bbcfb4fa5a1cc9e58e7c040bc |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1424-8220 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-12-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Sensors |
| spelling | doaj-art-86f79d7bbcfb4fa5a1cc9e58e7c040bc2024-12-27T14:53:18ZengMDPI AGSensors1424-82202024-12-012424819810.3390/s24248198Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze PositionLinda Krauze0Karola Panke1Gunta Krumina2Tatjana Pladere3Department of Optometry and Vision Science, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Latvia, Jelgavas Street 1, LV-1004 Riga, LatviaDepartment of Optometry and Vision Science, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Latvia, Jelgavas Street 1, LV-1004 Riga, LatviaDepartment of Optometry and Vision Science, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Latvia, Jelgavas Street 1, LV-1004 Riga, LatviaDepartment of Optometry and Vision Science, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Latvia, Jelgavas Street 1, LV-1004 Riga, LatviaEccentric photorefractometry is widely used to measure eye refraction, accommodation, gaze position, and pupil size. While the individual calibration of refraction and accommodation data has been extensively studied, gaze measurements have received less attention. PowerRef 3 does not incorporate individual calibration for gaze measurements, resulting in a divergent offset between the measured and expected gaze positions. To address this, we proposed two methods to calculate the physiological vergence angle based on the visual vergence data obtained from PowerRef 3. Twenty-three participants aged 25 ± 4 years viewed Maltese cross stimuli at distances of 25, 30, 50, 70, and 600 cm. The expected vergence angles were calculated considering the individual interpupillary distance at far. Our results demonstrate that the PowerRef 3 gaze data deviated from the expected vergence angles by 9.64 ± 2.73° at 25 cm and 9.25 ± 3.52° at 6 m. The kappa angle calibration method reduced the discrepancy to 3.93 ± 1.19° at 25 cm and 3.70 ± 0.36° at 600 cm, whereas the linear regression method further improved the accuracy to 3.30 ± 0.86° at 25 cm and 0.26 ± 0.01° at 600 cm. Both methods improved the gaze results, with the linear regression calibration method showing greater overall accuracy.https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/24/24/8198eccentric photorefractometryPowerRef 3kappa anglecalibrationobjective vergence |
| spellingShingle | Linda Krauze Karola Panke Gunta Krumina Tatjana Pladere Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze Position Sensors eccentric photorefractometry PowerRef 3 kappa angle calibration objective vergence |
| title | Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze Position |
| title_full | Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze Position |
| title_fullStr | Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze Position |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze Position |
| title_short | Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze Position |
| title_sort | comparative analysis of physiological vergence angle calculations from objective measurements of gaze position |
| topic | eccentric photorefractometry PowerRef 3 kappa angle calibration objective vergence |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/24/24/8198 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lindakrauze comparativeanalysisofphysiologicalvergenceanglecalculationsfromobjectivemeasurementsofgazeposition AT karolapanke comparativeanalysisofphysiologicalvergenceanglecalculationsfromobjectivemeasurementsofgazeposition AT guntakrumina comparativeanalysisofphysiologicalvergenceanglecalculationsfromobjectivemeasurementsofgazeposition AT tatjanapladere comparativeanalysisofphysiologicalvergenceanglecalculationsfromobjectivemeasurementsofgazeposition |