MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Kalman Filtering to Track Changes in Pupil Size for Automated Driving Systems

2021· article· en· W4200389689 on OpenAlexaff
Prarthana Pillai, Balakumar Balasingam, Arunita Jaekel, Francesco Biondi

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 IEEE 94th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2021-Fall) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistractionComputer scienceCognitive loadWorkloadAutomationHuman multitaskingSituation awarenessDriving simulatorKalman filterPupilBitTorrent trackerCognitionHuman–computer interactionTask (project management)Real-time computingEye trackingSimulationArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automation has become indispensable in all walks of everyday life. In driving environments, Automated Driving Systems (ADS) aid the driver by reducing the required workload and by improving road safety. These systems require human drivers to remain vigilant and maintain supervisory control over ADS. Therefore, the cognitive attention of the drivers must be estimated accurately for the safe adoption of ADS. Because of the non-invasive recording setup used in low-cost infrared eye-trackers, pupil size measurements are increasingly becoming applicable in the estimation of cognitive load. However, pupil size measurements are highly noisy, resulting in the poor classification of cognitive load levels. In this paper, we propose a methodology for improved classification of changes in cognitive load through the introduction of a state-space model-based approach to filter the pupil size data. The proposed approach was demonstrated on data collected from 16 participants while they performed driving task and several secondary tasks that are designed to emulate three different levels of driving distraction.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 IEEE 94th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2021-Fall)Same topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207