MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Physiological Signal Analysis and Classification of Stress from Virtual Reality Video Game

2020· article· en· W3081622852 on OpenAlexafffund
Syem Ishaque, Alice Rueda, Binh Nguyen, Naimul Khan, Sridhar Krishnan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSupport vector machineLinear discriminant analysisComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDecision treePattern recognition (psychology)Frequency domainStress (linguistics)Naive Bayes classifierSpeech recognitionVirtual realityMachine learningComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stress can affect a person's performance and health positively and negatively. A lot of the relaxation methods have been suggested to reduce the amount of stress. This study used virtual reality (VR) video games to alleviate stress. Physiological signals captured from Electrocardiogram (ECG), galvanic skin response (GSR), and respiration (RESP) were used to determine if the subject was stressed or relaxed. Time and frequency domain features were then extracted to evaluate stress levels. Frequency domain methods such as low-frequency (LF), high-frequency (HF), LF-HF ratio (LF/HF) are considered the most effective for HRV analysis, Poincare plots are moré discerning visually and shares a 81% correlation with LF/HF ratio. GSR is associated with EDA activity, which only increases due to stress. Stress and relax were classified using Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), Decision Tree, Support Vector machine (SVM), Gradient Boost (GB), and Naive Bayes. GB performed the best with an accuracy of 85% after 5 fold cross validation with 100 iterations, which is admirable from a small dataset with 50 samples.

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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations49
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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