Validation of Vigilance Decline Capability in A Simulated Test Environment: A Preliminary Step Towards Neuroadaptive Control
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Vigilance is the ability to sustain attention. It is crucial in tasks like piloting and driving that involve the ability to sustain attention. However, cognitive performance often falters with prolonged tasks, leading to reduced efficiency, slower reactions, and increased error likelihood. Identifying and addressing diminished vigilance is essential for enhancing driving safety. Neuro-physiological indicators have shown promising results to monitor vigilance, paving the way for neuroadaptive control of vigilance. In fact, the collection of vigilance-related physiological markers could allow, using neuroadaptive intelligent systems, a real-time adaption of tasks or the presentation of countermeasures to prevent errors that would ensue from such hypovigilant situations. Before reaching this goal, one must however collect valid data truly representative of hypovigilance which, in turn, can be used to develop prediction models of the vigilant state. This study serves as a proof of concept to assess validity of a testbed to induce and measure vigilance decline through a simulated test environment, validating controlled induction, and evaluating its impact on participants’ performance and subjective experiences. In total, 28 participants (10 females, 18 males) aged 18 to 35 (M = 23.75 years), were recruited. All participants held valid driving licenses and had corrected-to-normal vision. Data collection involved Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT), Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) and the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS) along with neuro-physiological specialized equipment: Enobio 8 EEG, Empatica E4, Polar H10 and Tobii Nano Pro eye tracker. Notably, this study is limited to demonstrating the results of PVT, KSS, and SSS, with the aim of assessing the effectiveness of the test setup. Participants self-reported their loss of vigilance by pressing a marker on the steering wheel. To induce hypovigilance, participants drove an automatic car in a low-traffic, monotonous environment for 60 minutes, featuring empty fields of grass and desert, employing specific in-game procedures. The driving task included instructions for lane-keeping, indicator usage, and maintaining speeds of up to 80 km/h, with no traffic lights or stop signs present. Experiments were conducted before lunch, between 9 am and 12 pm, ensuring maximum participant alertness, with instructions to abstain from caffeine, alcohol, nicotine, and cannabis on the experiment day. Results showed that the mean reaction time (RT) increased from 257.7 ms before driving to 276.8 ms after driving, t = 4.82, p < .0001, d = -0.61 whereas the median RT changed from 246.07 ms to 260.89 ms, t = 3.58, p = 0.0013, d= -0.53 indicating a statistically significant alteration in participant's psychomotor performance. The mean number of minor lapses in attention (RT >500ms) to the PVT increased from 1.11 before driving to 1.67 after driving, but was not statistically significant t = 1.66, p = 0.11, d = -0.28. KSS showed a considerable rise of sleepiness, with a mean of 4.11 (rather alert) before driving increasing to 5.96 (some signs of sleepiness) after driving, t = 5.65, p < .0001, d = -1.04. Similarly, the SSS demonstrated an increase in mean values from 2.57 (able to concentrate) before driving to 3.96 (somewhat foggy) after driving, t = 8.42, p < .0001, d = -1.20, signifying an increased perception of sleepiness following the driving activity. Lastly, the mean time of the first marker press was 17:38 minutes (SD = 9:47 minutes) indicating that the self-reported loss of vigilance occurred during the first 30 minutes of the driving task. The observed increase in PVT reaction time aligns with the declined alertness reported on both the KSS and SSS responses, suggesting a consistent decline in vigilance and alertness post-driving. In conclusion, the study underscores the effectiveness and validity of the simulated test environment in inducing vigilance decline, providing valuable insights into the impact on both objective and subjective measures. At the same time, the research sets the stage for exploring neuroadaptive control strategies, aiming to enhance task performance and safety. Ultimately, this will contribute to the development of a non-invasive artificial intelligence system capable of detecting vigilance states in extreme/challenging environments, e.g. for pilots and drivers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».