MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360989170 · doi:10.18280/ria.370119

Deep Learning Framework for Classification of Mental Stress from Multimodal Datasets

2023· article· en· W4360989170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karthick Thiyagarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health via Writing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceStress (linguistics)Deep learningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A healthy society must take proper measures to handle human stress, a severe health risk.To classify felt mental stress, this work offers an experimental inquiry to determine the proper phase when electroencephalography (EEG) based input from the DEAP dataset is combined with accelerometer sensor data from the WESAD dataset.A multisensory data fusion approach has been proposed to gather complete data for prognostic modeling and analysis.These techniques attempt to create a composite health index (HI) by fusing numerous sensor inputs.To get an aggregated version of the EEG-based data from the DEAP dataset and Accelerometer (ACC) sensor data from the WESAD dataset, we used the k-medoid data aggregation method with time-frame constrained intra-cluster similarity computations.The mental state is then classified into low-stress, medium-stress, and highstress categories using a CNN trained on this aggregated dataset.Three types of data low stress, medium stress, and high stress, are created.To categorize stress levels, we used three classifiers Support Vector Machine (SVM), Logical Regression (LR), and Naï ve Bayes (NB) are used.Three-class stress classification is accurate to 82.85% of the actual value.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.299 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicMental Health via WritingFrench-language works237,207