MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376506236 · doi:10.1061/jcemd4.coeng-13100

Identification and Classification of Physical Fatigue in Construction Workers Using Linear and Nonlinear Heart Rate Variability Measurements

2023· article· en· W4376506236 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetrended fluctuation analysisApproximate entropySample entropyHeart rate variabilityCorrelation dimensionPoincaré plotNonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceFrequency domainPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsLinear discriminant analysisStatisticsComputer scienceMedicineHeart rateFractal dimensionFractal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have analyzed heart rate variability (HRV) using nonlinear methods, such as approximate entropy, the largest Lyapunov exponent, and correlation dimension in patients with cardiovascular disorders. However, few studies have used nonlinear methods to analyze HRV in order to determine the level of physical fatigue experienced by construction workers. As a result, to identify and categorize physical fatigue in construction workers, the current study examined the linear and nonlinear approaches of HRV analysis. Fifteen healthy construction workers (mean age, 33.2±6.9 years) were selected for this study. A textile-based wearable sensor monitored each participant’s HRV after they completed 60 min of bar bending and fixing tasks. At baseline, 15, 30, 45, and 60 min into the task, participants were given the Borg-20 to measure their subjective levels of physical fatigue. Nonlinear [e.g., R-R interval (RRI) variability, entropy, detrended fluctuation analysis] and linear (e.g., time- and frequency-domain) HRV parameters were extracted. Five machine learning classifiers were used to identify and discern different physical fatigue levels. The accuracy and validity of the classifier models were evaluated using 10-fold cross-validation. The classification models were developed by either combining or individualized HRV features derived from linear and nonlinear HRV analyses. In the individualized feature sets, time-domain features had the highest classification accuracy (92%) based on the random forest (RF) classifier. The combined feature (i.e., the time-domain and nonlinear features) sets showed the highest classification accuracy (93.5%) using the RF classifier. In conclusion, this study showed that both linear and nonlinear HRV analyses can be used to detect and classify physical fatigue in construction workers. This research offers important contributions to the industry by analyzing the variations in linear and nonlinear HRV parameters in response to construction tasks. This study demonstrates that HRV values changed significantly in response to physical work, indicating a change in the relative activity of cardiac autonomic functions as a result of fatigue. Using the ways in which HRV parameters vary in response to increased workloads provides a sensitive marker for contrasting construction workers with and without cardiovascular disease. It also allows the site manager to track how quickly workers fatigue, so that they can switch up their workload to reduce the likelihood that any one worker would get severely exhausted, or to suggest that workers who are already severely fatigued take a break to prevent further injury.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.250 · 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