A pre/post evaluation of fatigue, stress and vigilance amongst commercially licensed truck drivers performing a prolonged driving task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose. The main purpose of this research study was to evaluate changes in fatigue, stress and vigilance amongst commercially licensed truck drivers involved in a prolonged driving task. The secondary purpose was to determine whether a new ergonomic seat could help reduce both physical and cognitive fatigue during a prolonged driving task. Two different truck seats were evaluated: an industrial standard seat and a new truck seat prototype. Methods. Twenty male truck drivers were recruited to attend two testing sessions, on two separate days, with each session randomized for seat design. During each session, participants performed two 10-min simulated driving tasks. Between simulated sessions, participants drove a long-haul truck for 90 min. Fatigue and stress were quantified using a series of questionnaires whereas vigilance was measured using a standardized computer test. Results. Seat interactions had a significant effect on fatigue patterns. Conclusion. The new ergonomic seat design holds potential in improving road safety and vehicle accidents due to fatigue-related accidents.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".