Multi-level Stress Assessment from ECG in a Virtual Reality Environment using Multimodal Fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ECG is an attractive option to assess stress in serious Virtual Reality (VR) applications due to its non-invasive nature. However, the existing Machine Learning (ML) models perform poorly. Moreover, existing studies only perform a binary stress assessment, while to develop a more engaging biofeedback-based application, multi-level assessment is necessary. Existing studies annotate and classify a single experience (e.g. watching a VR video) to a single stress level, which again prevents design of dynamic experiences where real-time in-game stress assessment can be utilized. In this paper, we report our findings on a new study on VR stress assessment, where three stress levels are assessed. ECG data was collected from 9 users experiencing a VR roller coaster. The VR experience was then manually labeled in 10-seconds segments to three stress levels by three raters. We then propose a novel multimodal deep fusion model utilizing spectrogram and 1D ECG that can provide a stress prediction from just a 1-second window. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed model outperforms the classical HRV-based ML models (9% increase in accuracy) and baseline deep learning models (2.5% increase in accuracy). We also report results on the benchmark WESAD dataset to show the supremacy of the model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".