MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293223615 · doi:10.11159/mhci22.103

Leveraging Initial Cognitive Load to Predict User Response to Complex Visual Tasks

2022· article· en· W4293223615 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Reem Albaghli, Yaman Jandali, Sarah Almahmid, Nada Attar

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitive loadHuman–computer interactionCognitionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we were able to show how cognitive load measurement during the initiation of a complex visual task can predict user response. We measured cognitive load using pupil size and microsaccade rate. The initial phase of task was defined as the first 25 percent of the trial Reaction Time (RT), which was variable up to 50 seconds. The complex visual task entailed a set of twelve words that could be grouped based into 1, 2, or 3 categories or sets, e.g., the words bed, pillow, headboard, etc. can be grouped into a single set that is bedroom. We found a significant correlation between initial cognitive load and final user response to the task. This study provides new insights into the initial cognitive processes that would have practical applications in adaptive user interface design, early warning controls, and detection in human performance.

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)0.017
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and ScienceSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207