MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967826912 · doi:10.1109/memea.2019.8802194

Emotions Assessment on Simulated Flights

2019· article· en· W2967826912 on OpenAlexaff
Válber César Cavalcanti Roza, Octavian Postolache, Voicu Groza, J. M. Dias Pereira

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadBoeing
KeywordsComputer scienceDisgustArtificial intelligenceTask (project management)Facial expressionArtificial neural networkFace (sociological concept)Mean squared errorSpeech recognitionMachine learningComputer visionPsychologyAngerStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emotions on pilots play important role on their performance during the service. Thus, an emotion prediction methodology based on physiological parameters such as galvanic skin response and heart rate as so as the facial recognition was considered in the present work. Several tests with eight volunteers were carried out that were used flight simulator. A small camera and the Face Reader software were used to record the users' face during the fly task and to perform the video off-line processing to extract facial emotions during performed flights. The considered emotions were: happy, sad, angry, surprised, scared and disgust. To predict these emotions, the Artificial Neural Network (ANN) was applied. The experiment shows that is possible to predict emotions using these data and the best predict model was reached with 2 hidden layers, having a minimum squared error of 0.219.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207