Traditional eye tracking requires specialized hardware, which means collecting gaze data from many observers is expensive, tedious and slow. Therefore, existing saliency prediction datasets are order-of-magnitudes smaller than typical datasets for other vision recognition tasks. The small size of these datasets limits the potential for training data intensive algorithms, and causes overfitting in benchmark evaluation. To address this deficiency, this paper introduces a webcam-based gaze tracking system that supports large-scale, crowdsourced eye tracking deployed on Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMTurk). By a combination of careful algorithm and gaming protocol design, our system obtains eye tracking data for saliency prediction comparable to data gathered in a traditional lab setting, with relatively lower cost and less effort on the part of the researchers. Using this tool, we build a saliency dataset for a large number of natural images. We will open-source our tool and provide a web server where researchers can upload their images to get eye tracking results from AMTurk.
For many applications in graphics, design, and human computer interaction, it is essential to understand where humans look in a scene. Where eye tracking devices are not a viable option, models of saliency can be used to predict fixation locations. Most saliency approaches are based on bottom-up computation that does not consider top-down image semantics and often does not match actual eye movements. To address this problem, we collected eye tracking data of 15 viewers on 1003 images and use this database as training and testing examples to learn a model of saliency based on low, middle and high-level image features. This large database of eye tracking data is publicly available with this paper. Systems based on bag-of-words models from image features collected at maxima of sparse interest point operators have been used successfully for both computer visual object and action recognition tasks. While the sparse, interest-point based approach to recognition is not inconsistent with visual processing in biological systems that operate in ‘saccade and fixate’ regimes, the methodology and emphasis in the human and the computer vision communities remains sharply distinct. Here, we make three contributions aiming to bridge this gap. First, we complement existing state-of-the art large scale dynamic computer vision annotated datasets like Hollywood-2 [1] and UCF Sports [2] with human eye movements collected under the ecological constraints of visual action and scene context recognition tasks. To our knowledge these are the first large human eye tracking datasets to be collected and made publicly available for video, vision.imar.ro eyetracking (497,107 frames, each viewed by 19 subjects), unique in terms of their (a) large scale and computer vision relevance, (b) dynamic, video stimuli, (c) task control, as well as free-viewing . Second, we introduce novel dynamic consistency and alignment measures , which underline the remarkable stability of patterns of visual search among subjects. Third, we leverage the significant amount of collected data in order to pursue studies and build automatic, end-to-end trainable computer vision systems based on human eye movements. Our studies not only shed light on the differences between computer vision spatio-temporal interest point image sampling strategies and the human fixations, as well as their impact for visual recognition performance, but also demonstrate that human fixations can be accurately predicted, and when used in an end-to-end automatic system, leveraging some of the advanced computer vision practice, can lead to state of the art results.  How predictable are human eye movements during search in real world scenes? We recorded 14 observers’ eye movements as they performed a search task (person detection) in 912 outdoor scenes. Observers were highly consistent in the regions fixated during search, even when the target was absent from the scene. These eye movements were used to evaluate computational models of search guidance from three sources: saliency, target features, and scene context. Each of these models independently outperformed a cross-image control in predicting human fixations. Models that combined sources of guidance ultimately predicted 94 of human agreement, with the scene context component providing the most explanatory power. None of the models, however, could reach the precision and fidelity of an attentional map defined by human fixations. This work puts forth a benchmark for computational models of search in real world scenes. Further improvements in This paper presents the results of two psychophysical experiments and an associated computational analysis designed to quantify the relationship between visual salience and visual importance. In the first experiment, importance maps were collected by asking human subjects to rate the relative visual importance of each object within a database of hand-segmented images. In the second experiment, experimental saliency maps were computed from visual gaze patterns measured for these same images by using an eye-tracker and task-free viewing. By comparing the importance maps with the saliency maps, we found that the maps are related, but perhaps less than one might expect. When coupled with the segmentation information, the saliency maps were shown to be effective at predicting the main subjects. However, the saliency maps were less effective at predicting the objects of secondary importance and the unimportant objects. We also found that the vast majority of early gaze position samples (0-2000 ms) were made on the main subjects, suggesting that a possible strategy of early visual coding might be to quickly locate the main subject(s) in the scene. Significant recent progress has been made in developing high-quality saliency models. However, less effort has been undertaken on fair assessment of these models, over large standardized datasets and correctly addressing confounding factors. In this study, we pursue a critical and quantitative look at challenges (e.g., center-bias, map smoothing) in saliency modeling and the way they affect model accuracy. We quantitatively compare 32 state-of-the-art models (using the shuffled AUC score to discount center-bias) on 4 benchmark eye movement datasets, for prediction of human fixation locations and scan path sequence. We also account for the role of map smoothing. We find that, although model rankings vary, some (e.g., AWS, LG, AIM, and HouNIPS) consistently outperform other models over all datasets. Some models work well for prediction of both fixation locations and scan path sequence (e.g., Judd, GBVS). Our results show low prediction accuracy for models over emotional stimuli from the NUSEF dataset. Our last benchmark, for the first time, gauges the ability of models to decode the stimulus category from statistics of fixations, saccades, and model saliency values at fixated locations. In this test, ITTI and AIM models win over other models. Our benchmark provides a comprehensive high-level picture of the strengths and weaknesses of many popular models, and suggests future research directions in saliency modeling. 