EP2298155A2

Method and arrangement for interpreting a drivers head and eye activity

Abstract

The present invention discloses a method for automated analysis of eye movement data, said method comprising the step of: processing data descriptive of eye movements observed in a subject using a computer-based processor by applying classification rules to the data and thereby identifying at least visual fixations experienced by the subject; and analyzing gaze-direction information associated with the identified fixations thereby developing data representative of directions in which the subject visually fixated during the period of data collection; segregating the developed data, based at least partially on fixation gaze-direction, into delimited data sets, each delimited data set representing an area/object-of-subject-interest existing during the period of data collection and at least one of said delimited data sets representing a region of typical eyes-forward driving based on a high-density pattern assessed from said gaze-direction information; and calculating a percentage road center (PRC) driver characteristic from the developed data representing a relative quantification of driver maintained, eyes-forward driving during a prescribed period of time.

EP2298155A2, drawing sheet 1
Sheet 1 of 21

Term

Term ended

Projected expiry passed 15 October 2023, 2.9 years ago.

  1. Priority
  2. Filed
  3. Published
  4. Projected expiry
  5. Today

26 claims: 24 independent, 2 dependent

  1. 1
    A method for automated analysis of eye movement data, said method comprising:processing data descriptive of eye movements observed in a subject using a computer-based processor by applying classification rules to the data and thereby identifying at least visual fixations experienced by the subject;and analyzing gaze-direction information associated with the identified fixations thereby developing data representative of directions in which the subject visually fixated during the period of data collection;segregating the developed data, based at least partially on fixation gaze-direction, into delimited data sets, each delimited data set representing an area/object-of-subject-interest existing during the period of data collection and at least one of said delimited data sets representing a region of typical eyes-forward driving based on a high-density pattern assessed from said gaze-direction information;and calculating a percentage road center (PRC) driver characteristic from the developed data representing a relative quantification of driver maintained, eyes-forward driving during a prescribed period of time.
  2. 4
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:basing said at least one glance-defining rule on at least one characteristic selected from the group including: glance duration, glance frequency, total glance time, and total task time.
  3. 5
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:segregating said identified glances into delimited glance sets based at least partially on a gaze-direction during the respective glance, each of said segregated glance sets representing an area/object-of-subject-interest existing during the period of data collection.
  4. 6
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:assessing a relative density of one glance set in comparison to at least one other glance set, and based thereupon, identifying the represented area/object-of-subject- interest of the compared glance set.
  5. 7
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:assessing a relative density of at least one glance set among a plurality of glance sets, and based upon a mapping of said assessed relative density to known relative densities associated with settings of the type in which the eye movement data was collected, identifying the represented area/object-of-subject-interest of the compared glance set.
  6. 8
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:assessing relative densities of at least two glance sets developed from data descriptive of eye movements observed in a known setting;and identifying the represented area/object-of-subject-interest of each of the two compared glance sets and ascertaining locations of said represented areas/objects-of-subject-interest in the known setting thereby establishing a special reference frame for the known setting.
  7. 9
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, wherein said subject is a driver of a vehicle and based on a density of at least one of the glance data sets, an eyes-forward, normal driver eye orientation is deduced.
  8. 10
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, wherein said applied classification rules comprise at least criteria defining fixations and transitions.
  9. 11
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, wherein said applied classification rules further comprise criteria defining saccades.
  10. 12
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, wherein said subject is a driver of a vehicle and the method further comprises utilizing a plurality of analysis protocols dependent upon prevailing noise characteristics associated with the data set being processed.
  11. 13
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:applying a first data filter of predetermined stringency to an input stream of data comprising said data descriptive of eye movements observed in a driver of a vehicle utilizing said computer-based processor and therefrom outputting a first filtered data stream corresponding to said input stream of data;and assessing quality of said outputted first filtered data stream by applying a first approval rule thereto, and data of said outputted first filtered data stream passing said first approval rule being outputted and constituting an approved first stream of data.
  12. 14
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:applying a second data filter of greater stringency than said first data filter to the input stream of data utilizing said computer-based processor and therefrom outputting a second filtered data stream corresponding to said a first filtered data stream via common derivation from the input stream of data;and assessing quality of said outputted second filtered data stream by applying a second approval rule thereto, and data of said outputted second filtered data stream passing said second approval rule being outputted and constituting a approved second stream of data.
  13. 15
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:composing a collective approved stream of data constituted by an entirety of said approved first stream of data, and said collective approved stream of data being further constituted by portions of said approved second stream of data corresponding to unapproved portions of said outputted first filtered data stream.
  14. 16
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, wherein said first and second approval rules are the same.
  15. 17
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, wherein said first and second approval rules are based on the same criteria.
  16. 18
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:selecting at least two analysis protocols to constitute said plurality from a group consisting of: (1) a velocity based, dual threshold protocol that is best suited, relative to the other members of the group, to low-noise-content eye behavior data;(2) a distance based, dispersion spacing protocol that is best suited, relative to the other members of the group, to moderate-noise-content eye and eyelid behavior data;and (3) an ocular characteristic based, rule oriented protocol that is best suited, relative to the other members of the group, to high-noise-content eye behavior data.
  17. 19
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, wherein said selection of protocols for any given data set is biased toward one of said three protocols in dependence upon a detected noise level in the data set.
  18. 20
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, wherein said rule oriented protocol considers one or more of the following standards in a discrimination between fixations and saccades:(1) fixation duration must exceed 150 ms;(2) saccade duration must not exceed 200 ms;and saccades begin and end in two different locations.
  19. 21
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:assessing quality of said data descriptive of eye movement based on relative utilization of respective analysis protocols among said plurality of analysis protocols.
  20. 22
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:assessing quality of said data descriptive of eye movement considering time-based, relative utilization of respective analysis protocols among a plurality of analysis protocols over a prescribed time period.
  21. 23
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:analyzing a stream of collected driver eye-gaze data utilizing a stream-traversing primary time-window of prescribed period and detecting an artifact that clouds the trueness of a portion of the data stream;and resorting to a secondary moving time-window simultaneously traversing said data stream and generating highly filtered data from said collected data when said artifact is encountered.
  22. 24
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:analyzing a stream of collected driver eye-gaze data utilizing a stream-traversing primary time-window of prescribed period;and detecting characteristics within said primary time-window indicative of data quality-degradation beyond a prescribed quality threshold level during data stream traversal.
  23. 25
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:resorting to a secondary moving time-window simultaneously traversing said data stream and generating highly filtered data from said collected data when said data quality-degradation exceeds the prescribed quality threshold level.
  24. 26
    The method as recited in any preceding claim, further comprising:returning to said primary moving time-window when said data quality-degradation is detected to have subsided within the prescribed quality threshold level.
Independent claims24