MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774910776 · doi:10.1109/smc.2017.8122573

EEG coupling features: Towards mental workload measurement based on wearables

2017· article· en· W2774910776 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre Drouin-Picaro, Isabela Albuquerque, Jean‐François Gagnon, Daniel Lafond, Tiago H. Falk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsThales (Canada)Institut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkloadComputer scienceWearable computerSoftware portabilityElectroencephalographyTask (project management)Real-time computingWearable technologyHuman–computer interactionSIGNAL (programming language)SimulationArtificial intelligenceEngineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automated mental workload measurement is particularly important in safety-critical settings, such as in nuclear plants, aviation, air traffic control, shipping, and transportation, to name a few. As an example, recent statistics have suggested that 90% of the accidents in the transport industry are due to human factors. In this paper, we explore the potential of off-the-shelf wearable technologies in monitoring mental workload in real-time, thus potentially reducing the number of accidents due to human errors. Wearable technologies, while providing the user with ease-of-use, comfort, and portability, have several limitations, such as lower quality signal readings (e.g., due to dry electrodes) and smaller number of recording sites. Such limitations place a burden on the accuracy of existing mental workload models. To overcome this limitation, we propose the use of phase-amplitude and amplitude-amplitude coupling features computed from a portable commercial electroencephalography (EEG) device. Experiments with three different tasks, namely N-back, mental rotation and visual search, show the proposed features being significantly correlated with multiple dimensions of the widely-used NASA task load index test and providing complementary information to other conventional features.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.310 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207