cs.CVOct 6, 2026

From Laboratory to Road: Evaluating Wearable Gaze Accuracy for Driving

Authors: William Engel, Fabian Flohr

Organizations: Intelligent Vehicles Lab, Hochschule München, Germany

Abstract

Bird's-eye-view (BEV) representations have become a widely used interface between perception and planning in autonomous driving, but they encode what is in a scene, not what is behaviorally relevant to a human driver. Gaze offers a compelling behavioral signal for this gap, yet wearable eye trackers are routinely deployed as if their spatial output were ground truth, despite known sensitivity to head motion, illumination, and calibration drift. We present, to our knowledge, the first unified framework for quantifying wearable gaze accuracy under real driving conditions. Our on-road study contains 41 validated scenes in which one driver fixated a vehicle's license plate. Gaze error is measured as the angular difference between the plate center and the gaze direction estimated by the glasses. Separate indoor studies with the same driver and device systematically analyze how distance, illumination, head motion, target motion, and gaze eccentricity affect both systematic bias and gaze precision. The mean on-road error was 4.58 degrees. Applying an offset estimated from the indoor recordings reduced it to 1.10 degrees and improved all 41 scenes. Because this offset varied between sessions, reliable BEV supervision may require online recalibration and condition-dependent estimates of gaze uncertainty.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Aug 9, 2026cs.CV

Can Webcam Gaze Constrain Mesa-Objectives in Driving Models? An Instrument Precision Analysis

Current hazard detection systems in autonomous driving may develop mesa objectives, learned internal goals that achieve high training performance through spurious correlations rather than genuine hazard recognition. We investigate whether human gaze patterns, captured via webcam-based eye tracking (WebGazer.js), can serve as privileged information to constrain mesa-objective formation. We collected 137,663 frame-level gaze samples synchronized with hazard annotations across 388 real dashcam clips, then test this hypothesis across two calibration protocols (9-point/45-click and 11-point/440-click), two model architectures (Random Forest and causal Transformer), and five random seeds per experiment with paired t-tests. No experiment yields a statistically significant improvement from gaze (p = 0.919, 0.578, and 0.667 respectively). A geometric analysis reveals the root cause: WebGazer's reported error (~130-257 px depending on configuration) exceeds 93% of detected hazard object sizes (median 36 px), rendering object-level gaze attribution physically impossible at this instrument precision.
Apr 21, 2026cs.CV

SGAP-Gaze: Scene Grid Attention Based Point-of-Gaze Estimation Network for Driver Gaze

Driver gaze estimation is essential for understanding the driver's situational awareness of surrounding traffic. Existing gaze estimation models use driver facial information to predict the Point-of-Gaze (PoG) or the 3D gaze direction vector. We propose a benchmark dataset, Urban Driving-Face Scene Gaze (UD-FSG), comprising synchronized driver-face and traffic-scene images. The scene images provide cues about surrounding traffic, which can help improve the gaze estimation model, along with the face images. We propose SGAP-Gaze, Scene-Grid Attention based Point-of-Gaze estimation network, trained and tested on our UD-FSG dataset, which explicitly incorporates the scene images into the gaze estimation modelling. The gaze estimation network integrates driver face, eye, iris, and scene contextual information. First, the extracted features from facial modalities are fused to form a gaze intent vector. Then, attention scores are computed over the spatial scene grid using a Transformer-based attention mechanism fusing face and scene image features to obtain the PoG. The proposed SGAP-Gaze model achieves a mean pixel error of 104.73 on the UD-FSG dataset and 63.48 on LBW dataset, achieving a 23.5% reduction in mean pixel error compared to state-of-the-art driver gaze estimation models. The spatial pixel distribution analysis shows that SGAP-Gaze consistently achieves lower mean pixel error than existing methods across all spatial ranges, including the outer regions of the scene, which are rare but critical for understanding driver attention. These results highlight the effectiveness of integrating multi-modal gaze cues with scene-aware attention for a robust driver PoG estimation model in real-world driving environments.
Sep 14, 2026cs.CV

Context-Aware Causal Gaze Forecasting for Human-Vehicle Interaction During In-Cabin Tracking Dropouts

Dashboard-mounted gaze trackers often lose sight of the driver's eyes during large head rotations, including shoulder checks, mirror glances, and intersection scanning. These maneuvers occur when information about the driver's visual attention is most useful. Offline gap-filling methods may reconstruct a missing interval using observations from both sides, but an online driver-monitoring system cannot rely on measurements that have not yet occurred. We therefore formulate causal gaze recovery: forecasting unavailable gaze at time t without target-tracker gaze at t or later. We introduce the Causal Context-Gated Forecaster (CCGF), which encodes a 60-frame pre-dropout history of gaze and head pose and combines it with DINOv3 scene features. A learned reliability gate controls the contribution of the history and scene representations as the dropout progresses. We evaluate two scene conditions: Live, in which the scene representation continues to update during tracker loss, and Frozen, in which the final pre-dropout representation is used throughout the missing interval. We evaluate CCGF on 2,047 eligible, naturally occurring GazeSense head_lost events drawn from 10.5 h of naturalistic driving by ten drivers. Across all recordings, head_lost accounts for 8.5 percent of GazeSense recording time. Synchronized gaze coordinates from a head-mounted Neon tracker provide supervision and evaluation targets but are never used as model inputs. Under leave-one-driver-out evaluation, CCGF achieves a mean per-driver median error of 175.7 px (10.5 deg) with Live scene updates, a 33 percent reduction relative to history-only causal forecasting. With Frozen scene input, the error increases to 210.8 px (12.9 deg), indicating that scene observations acquired during the dropout provide useful predictive information. We will release the dataset, evaluation protocol, and causal baselines.