MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082306761 · doi:10.2196/17823

Biosensor Real-Time Affective Analytics in Virtual and Mixed Reality Medical Education Serious Games: Cohort Study

2020· article· en· W3082306761 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Panagiotis E. Antoniou, George Arfaras, Niki Pandria, Alkinoos Athanasiou, George Ntakakis, Emmanouil Babatsikos, Vasilis Nigdelis, Panagiotis D. Bamidis

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Serious Games · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyBiosignalWearable computerVirtual realityPsychologyMedicineApplied psychologyHuman–computer interactionComputer scienceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The role of emotion is crucial to the learning process, as it is linked to motivation, interest, and attention. Affective states are expressed in the brain and in overall biological activity. Biosignals, like heart rate (HR), electrodermal activity (EDA), and electroencephalography (EEG) are physiological expressions affected by emotional state. Analyzing these biosignal recordings can point to a person's emotional state. Contemporary medical education has progressed extensively towards diverse learning resources using virtual reality (VR) and mixed reality (MR) applications. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to study the efficacy of wearable biosensors for affect detection in a learning process involving a serious game in the Microsoft HoloLens VR/MR platform. METHODS: A wearable array of sensors recording HR, EDA, and EEG signals was deployed during 2 educational activities conducted by 11 participants of diverse educational level (undergraduate, postgraduate, and specialist neurosurgeon doctors). The first scenario was a conventional virtual patient case used for establishing the personal biosignal baselines for the participant. The second was a case in a VR/MR environment regarding neuroanatomy. The affective measures that we recorded were EEG (theta/beta ratio and alpha rhythm), HR, and EDA. RESULTS: Results were recorded and aggregated across all 3 groups. Average EEG ratios of the virtual patient (VP) versus the MR serious game cases were recorded at 3.49 (SD 0.82) versus 3.23 (SD 0.94) for students, 2.59 (SD 0.96) versus 2.90 (SD 1.78) for neurosurgeons, and 2.33 (SD 0.26) versus 2.56 (SD 0.62) for postgraduate medical students. Average alpha rhythm of the VP versus the MR serious game cases were recorded at 7.77 (SD 1.62) μV versus 8.42 (SD 2.56) μV for students, 7.03 (SD 2.19) μV versus 7.15 (SD 1.86) μV for neurosurgeons, and 11.84 (SD 6.15) μV versus 9.55 (SD 3.12) μV for postgraduate medical students. Average HR of the VP versus the MR serious game cases were recorded at 87 (SD 13) versus 86 (SD 12) bpm for students, 81 (SD 7) versus 83 (SD 7) bpm for neurosurgeons, and 81 (SD 7) versus 77 (SD 6) bpm for postgraduate medical students. Average EDA of the VP versus the MR serious game cases were recorded at 1.198 (SD 1.467) μS versus 4.097 (SD 2.79) μS for students, 1.890 (SD 2.269) μS versus 5.407 (SD 5.391) μS for neurosurgeons, and 0.739 (SD 0.509) μS versus 2.498 (SD 1.72) μS for postgraduate medical students. The variations of these metrics have been correlated with existing theoretical interpretations regarding educationally relevant affective analytics, such as engagement and educational focus. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that this novel sensor configuration can lead to credible affective state detection and can be used in platforms like intelligent tutoring systems for providing real-time, evidence-based, affective learning analytics using VR/MR-deployed medical education resources.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations77
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Serious GamesSame topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207