A Comparison of Two ECG Inter-beat Interval Measurement Methods for HRV-Based MentalWorkload Prediction of Ambulant Users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart rate variability (HRV) has been studied in the context of human behavior analysis and many features have been extracted from the inter-beat interval (RR) time series and tested as correlates of constructs such as mental workload, stress and anxiety. Extraction of inter-beat interval series requires processing of the electrocardiogram (ECG) signal. This processingis critical for high quality RR series extraction and overall HRV measurement. Typically, the Pan-Tomkins peak detection algorithm is used. Recently, however, innovative modulation spectral based heart rate detection methods have been proposed. In this paper, we compare the performance of both algorithms and their effects on HRV measurement for mental workload assessment under physical activity. Experiments were conducted with 45 participants while they performed the NASA Revised Multi- Attribute Task Battery II (MATB-II) under different types and levels of physical activity. We show that modulation spectrum based methods perform better than conventional peak detection methods for mental workload prediction in lower levels of physical activity, particularly in the bike riding condition.
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".