MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990012912 · doi:10.1177/1071181319631313

Using an Integrated Cognitive Architecture to Model the Effect of Environmental Complexity on Drivers’ Situation Awareness

2019· article· en· W2990012912 on OpenAlexaff
Umair Rehman, Shi Cao, Carolyn MacGregor

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive architectureComputer scienceCognitionCognitive modelDriving simulatorArchitectureHuman–computer interactionModalitiesSimulationArtificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this research is to computationally model and simulate drivers’ situation awareness (SA). In order to achieve this, we have developed a computational cognitive model in a cognitive architecture that can be connected to interact with a driving simulator, as means to infer quantitative predictions of drivers’ SA. We demonstrate the theory of modelling and predicting SA through the lens of human cognition utilizing the QN-ACTR (Queueing Network-Adaptive Control of Thought-Rational) framework as a foundation. We integrate a dynamic visual sampling model (SEEV) to create QN-ACTR-SA in order to allow the model to simulate realistic attention allocation patterns of human drivers. A driver model is also incorporated within QN-ACTR-SA architecture that can simulate human driving behavior by interacting with a driving simulator with the help of virtual modalities such as motor, visual and memory functions. A preliminary validation study is conducted to determine whether SA results of the model correspond to empirical data. The model is probed with SA queries similar to how a Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT) is conducted on human participants. A comparative assessment demonstrates the model’s ability to simulate drivers’ SA in both easy (with fewer traffic vehicles and signboards) and complex (with more traffic vehicles and signboards) driving conditions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207