| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Free |
| Capabilities | 9 decomposed | 7 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Captures and analyzes eye movement patterns (saccades, smooth pursuits, fixations, nystagmus) using infrared corneal reflection tracking at 60-250Hz sampling rates to quantify deviations from normative oculomotor baselines. The system applies machine learning classifiers trained on neurologically-healthy control populations to detect subclinical abnormalities in eye-movement kinematics that precede visible neurological symptoms, enabling detection of early-stage neurodegenerative conditions like Parkinson's, cerebellar ataxia, and progressive supranuclear palsy before conventional clinical signs emerge.
Unique: Uses high-frequency infrared corneal reflection eye-tracking (60-250Hz) combined with machine learning classifiers trained on normative oculomotor baselines to detect subclinical neurological abnormalities invisible to human clinical observation, rather than relying on subjective bedside neurological examination or coarse video-based gaze estimation
vs alternatives: Detects neurological abnormalities 6-18 months earlier than conventional clinical exams by quantifying subtle oculomotor changes, whereas traditional neurological testing relies on observable motor/cognitive deficits that emerge only after significant neuronal loss
Stores baseline oculomotor metrics for individual patients and compares subsequent assessments against personalized baselines using statistical process control methods (e.g., exponentially-weighted moving average, control charts) to detect statistically-significant decline trajectories. The system generates alerts when oculomotor metrics deviate beyond patient-specific confidence intervals, enabling clinicians to quantify disease progression velocity and adjust therapeutic interventions based on objective biomarker trends rather than subjective symptom reports.
Unique: Applies statistical process control methods (control charts, EWMA) to individual patient baselines rather than population-level comparisons, enabling detection of patient-specific decline trajectories that may deviate from population norms due to genetic or disease heterogeneity
vs alternatives: Provides objective, quantified disease progression metrics superior to subjective clinical rating scales (MDS-UPDRS, MMSE) which suffer from inter-rater variability and floor/ceiling effects, enabling earlier detection of therapeutic response or disease acceleration
Integrates oculomotor metrics with optional supplementary neurological data (tremor accelerometry, gait kinematics, cognitive reaction times) into ensemble machine learning classifiers (random forests, gradient boosting, neural networks) trained on clinically-diagnosed patient cohorts to generate probabilistic diagnoses for specific neurological conditions. The system outputs condition-specific probability scores (e.g., 78% Parkinson's, 12% essential tremor, 10% other) with confidence intervals, enabling clinicians to rank differential diagnoses and prioritize confirmatory testing.
Unique: Combines oculomotor metrics with optional multimodal sensor data (tremor, gait, cognition) in ensemble classifiers trained on clinically-confirmed patient cohorts, rather than relying on single-modality biomarkers or population-level diagnostic criteria that lack individual patient specificity
vs alternatives: Provides probabilistic differential diagnoses superior to rule-based diagnostic criteria (e.g., UK Parkinson's Disease Society Brain Bank criteria) which are binary and lack confidence quantification, enabling clinicians to make risk-stratified decisions about confirmatory testing
Captures raw eye-gaze coordinates and pupil diameter from infrared corneal reflection eye-tracker hardware at 60-250Hz sampling rates, applies real-time preprocessing (blink detection, saccade detection via velocity thresholding, fixation clustering, outlier removal) to clean noisy tracking data, and streams preprocessed gaze events to downstream analysis pipelines. The system implements hardware-specific calibration routines (9-point or 13-point grid calibration) and validates tracking quality metrics (gaze accuracy, precision, data loss rate) before accepting data for clinical analysis.
Unique: Implements hardware-specific calibration and real-time preprocessing pipelines (blink detection, saccade detection, fixation clustering) optimized for clinical eye-tracking hardware, with quality assurance metrics that validate tracking fidelity before data enters clinical analysis workflows
vs alternatives: Provides clinical-grade eye-tracking data acquisition with real-time quality validation, superior to consumer-grade eye-tracking (e.g., webcam-based gaze estimation) which lacks hardware calibration, has 2-5x lower accuracy, and cannot reliably detect saccades or fixations
Implements standardized visual stimulus presentation sequences (fixation tasks, smooth pursuit tasks, saccadic tasks, optokinetic nystagmus tasks) with precise timing control and stimulus geometry to elicit reproducible oculomotor responses across patients and assessment sessions. The system presents calibrated visual targets at defined eccentricities and velocities, records stimulus timing metadata, and ensures consistent task execution across different clinical sites through protocol validation and technician training modules.
Unique: Implements standardized oculomotor testing protocols with precise stimulus timing control and geometry validation, ensuring reproducible task execution across patients, sessions, and clinical sites — critical for longitudinal tracking and multi-site clinical trials
vs alternatives: Provides protocol-driven stimulus presentation superior to ad-hoc bedside oculomotor testing, which lacks standardization, precise timing control, and reproducibility across assessments
Compares individual patient oculomotor metrics against age-stratified, ethnicity-stratified normative reference databases using z-score calculations to quantify deviation magnitude from healthy population norms. The system applies demographic-specific normalization (accounting for age-related oculomotor decline, sex differences, ethnic variation) and generates percentile ranks and confidence intervals around deviation scores, enabling clinicians to interpret whether observed oculomotor abnormalities are statistically significant or within normal variation.
Unique: Applies demographic-stratified normative comparison (age, ethnicity, sex) rather than single population-level norms, accounting for known oculomotor variation across demographic groups and reducing false-positive abnormality detection in normal ethnic variation
vs alternatives: Provides objective, quantified abnormality detection via z-scores superior to subjective clinical interpretation of oculomotor findings, which is prone to inter-rater variability and cognitive biases
Exports oculomotor assessment results (metrics, diagnoses, longitudinal trends) in standardized clinical report formats compatible with electronic health record systems, including structured data fields (FHIR-compatible observations) and human-readable narrative summaries. The system generates PDF reports suitable for clinician review and EHR import, with embedded visualizations (metric trends, diagnostic probability charts) and recommendations for follow-up testing or therapeutic intervention.
Unique: Generates standardized clinical reports with structured FHIR-compatible data export for EHR integration, rather than standalone reports disconnected from clinical workflows — enabling seamless integration of oculomotor biomarkers into existing clinical decision-making processes
vs alternatives: Provides EHR-integrated reporting superior to standalone assessment tools that generate isolated reports requiring manual data entry into EHR systems, reducing documentation burden and enabling longitudinal tracking within clinical workflows
Monitors eye-tracking data quality metrics in real-time (gaze accuracy, precision, data loss rate, tracking confidence) and flags assessment sessions with suboptimal data quality that may compromise diagnostic validity. The system implements automated quality checks (e.g., gaze accuracy >1.5 degrees triggers recalibration alert, data loss >10% triggers session rejection) and generates quality assurance reports documenting tracking performance and protocol compliance for each assessment session.
Unique: Implements real-time quality monitoring with automated alerts and session-level quality documentation, ensuring that only high-fidelity eye-tracking data enters clinical analysis pipelines — critical for diagnostic validity in clinical settings
vs alternatives: Provides automated quality assurance superior to manual quality review, which is subjective and prone to inconsistency across technicians and sites, enabling standardized data quality across multi-site clinical trials
+1 more capabilities
Enables evaluation of AI systems' ability to perform chained mathematical operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, comparisons) across both structured tables and unstructured text extracted from SEC filings. The dataset provides ground-truth question-answer pairs where answers require synthesizing data from multiple locations within earnings reports and applying sequential arithmetic operations, testing whether models can decompose complex financial queries into discrete computational steps.
Unique: Combines real SEC filing documents (not synthetic) with crowdsourced questions requiring multi-step arithmetic, creating a hybrid dataset that tests both domain knowledge extraction and quantitative reasoning in a single evaluation task. Unlike generic math word problems, answers require locating figures within 10+ page documents first.
vs alternatives: More challenging than DROP or SVAMP because it requires financial domain knowledge AND document retrieval before arithmetic, whereas generic math benchmarks assume figures are already extracted
Assesses whether AI systems understand financial terminology, accounting concepts, and domain-specific metrics by requiring them to answer questions about real earnings reports from S&P 500 companies. The dataset tests recognition of financial line items (revenue, COGS, operating expenses, net income), ability to distinguish between different financial statements (income statement vs balance sheet), and understanding of financial ratios and metrics without explicit instruction on their definitions.
Unique: Uses authentic SEC filings rather than synthetic financial data, exposing models to real-world accounting variations, footnote complexity, and the actual structure of professional financial documents. This tests transfer learning from general text to specialized domain without domain-specific pretraining.
vs alternatives: More authentic than synthetic financial QA datasets because it uses real earnings reports with their inherent complexity, but narrower than general financial knowledge benchmarks because it focuses only on historical data interpretation
FinQA scores higher at 60/100 vs NeuroClues at 40/100. FinQA also has a free tier, making it more accessible.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Enables evaluation of AI systems' ability to extract numerical data from both structured HTML/text tables and unstructured prose within the same document, then reason over the extracted values. The dataset contains questions where relevant data appears in different formats — some figures are in formatted tables with clear row/column headers, while others are embedded in narrative text or footnotes — requiring robust parsing and entity linking before computation can occur.
Unique: Combines structured table data with unstructured narrative in the same evaluation, forcing systems to handle format heterogeneity and resolve references across different data representations. Most table QA datasets use clean, isolated tables; this tests real-world document complexity.
vs alternatives: More realistic than isolated table QA benchmarks (like SQA or WikiTableQuestions) because it requires handling narrative context and format mixing, but simpler than full document understanding because tables are already in text format (no OCR needed)
Provides a curated, crowdsourced-annotated dataset of 8,281 question-answer pairs with multi-step reasoning requirements, enabling systematic evaluation of AI systems on financial numerical reasoning. The dataset includes quality control mechanisms through crowdworker annotation, answer validation against ground truth, and coverage across diverse financial metrics and company types within the S&P 500, creating a reproducible evaluation standard for the financial AI community.
Unique: Provides a publicly available, reproducible benchmark specifically designed for financial numerical reasoning with real SEC filings, enabling standardized comparison across different financial AI systems. Most financial datasets are proprietary or synthetic; this is open-source and authentic.
vs alternatives: More specialized and challenging than generic QA benchmarks (SQuAD, MRQA) because it requires financial domain knowledge and multi-step arithmetic, but narrower in scope than comprehensive financial understanding benchmarks because it focuses only on numerical reasoning
Assesses AI systems' ability to perform multi-hop reasoning by requiring them to locate and combine information from different sections of earnings reports. Questions may require finding a figure in the income statement, then locating a related metric in the balance sheet, then performing arithmetic across both — testing whether models can maintain context across document boundaries and understand relationships between different financial statement sections.
Unique: Embeds multi-hop reasoning requirements within authentic financial documents where hops correspond to real relationships between financial statement sections, rather than synthetic reasoning chains. This tests whether models understand domain structure, not just generic multi-hop patterns.
vs alternatives: More realistic than synthetic multi-hop datasets (HotpotQA, 2WikiMultiHopQA) because reasoning hops follow actual financial relationships, but less controlled because document structure varies and reasoning paths are implicit rather than explicitly annotated
Enables evaluation of whether AI systems can identify which arithmetic operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, comparison) are required to answer financial questions, then execute them correctly. The dataset implicitly tests operation selection — a question asking 'what is the profit margin' requires division (net income / revenue), while 'what is total assets' requires addition — forcing models to understand financial semantics before applying math.
Unique: Embeds arithmetic operation selection within financial domain context, requiring models to understand that 'margin' semantically maps to division and 'total' maps to addition. This tests semantic grounding of operations, not just arithmetic execution.
vs alternatives: More semantically grounded than generic math word problem datasets because operation selection is implicit in financial terminology, but less explicit than datasets with annotated operation types because operations must be inferred
Provides evaluation capability for AI systems to compare financial metrics across multiple S&P 500 companies or aggregate metrics across different time periods within the same company's earnings reports. While individual questions reference single documents, the dataset structure enables evaluation of systems that can retrieve and compare relevant companies, requiring understanding of which metrics are comparable across entities and how to normalize for company size or accounting differences.
Unique: Provides a foundation for evaluating cross-company financial comparison by including diverse S&P 500 companies with different business models and scales, enabling assessment of whether systems can normalize and compare metrics appropriately. Most financial QA datasets focus on single-document questions.
vs alternatives: Enables cross-company evaluation unlike single-document QA datasets, but requires external retrieval and comparison logic because the dataset itself contains only single-document questions