MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2581011160 · doi:10.1049/htl.2016.0106

Technique to estimate human reaction time based on visual perception

2017· article· en· W2581011160 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Abbasi‐Kesbi, Hamidreza Memarzadeh‐Tehran, M. Jamal Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Technology Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGyroscopeWearable computerStandard deviationTransceiverWirelessMean squared errorArtificial intelligenceMotion captureSimulationComputer visionSpeech recognitionMotion (physics)StatisticsMathematicsEngineeringTelecommunicationsEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design and implementation of a wearable system to estimate the human reaction time (HRT) to visual stimulus based on two identical wireless motion sensors are described. Each sensor incorporates a motion sensor (gyroscope), a processor and a transceiver operating at the industrial, scientific and medical frequency of 2.45 GHz. Relevant tests to estimate the HRT are performed in two different scenarios including simple and recognition tests for 90 pairs of measurements. The obtained results are compared with a computer‐based system to determine the accuracy of the proposed system. The root mean square error, standard deviation error and mean error of the results are 2.88, 6.17 and 0.3 ms for simple test while for recognition test as low as 3.34, 7.83 and 0.35 ms, respectively. The outcomes of the HRT estimation tests confirm HRT can increase by 40–87% due to increased fatigue levels.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Technology LettersSame topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207