Alertness and psychomotor performance levels of marine pilots on an irregular work roster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fatigue is recognized as an important safety concern in the transportation industry. In this study, our goal was to investigate how circadian and sleep-wake dependent factors influence St-Lawrence River pilots' sleep-wake cycle, alertness and psychomotor performance levels at work. A total of 18 male St-Lawrence River ship pilots were recruited to a 16-21-day field study. Pilots' chronotype, sleepiness and insomnia levels were documented using standardized questionnaires. Their sleep-wake cycle was documented by a sleep-wake log and wrist-worn activity monitoring. Subjective alertness and objective psychomotor performances were assessed ~5×/day for each work and rest day. Ship transits were distributed throughout the 24-h day and lasted on average (± SEM) 5.93 ± 0.67 h. Main sleep periods occurred mainly at night, and objectively lasted 6.04 ± 1.02 h before work days. When going to bed at the end of work days, pilots subjectively reported sleeping 7.64 ± 1.64 h in the prior 24 h. Significant diurnal and wake-dependent effects were observed for subjective alertness and objective psychomotor performance, with minimum levels occurring between 09:00 and 10:00. Thus, despite their irregular work schedule, ship pilots presented, as a group, a diurnal variation of alertness and psychomotor performance indicative of a day-oriented circadian system. Important inter-individual differences were observed on psychomotor performance mesor and phase. In individuals, earlier phases in psychomotor performance were correlated with earlier chronotype. This study indicates that both circadian and homeostatic processes modulate alertness and psychomotor performance levels with worst levels reached when long shifts ended in the morning. This work has potential applications as it indicates fatigue countermeasures considering both processes are scientifically based.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".