MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390574613 · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/ad1ac1

EEG-based hierarchical classification of level of demand and modality of auditory and visual sensory processing

2024· article· en· W4390574613 on OpenAlexafffund
Faghihe Massaeli, Sarah Power

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsModality (human–computer interaction)Sensory systemElectroencephalographySensory processingComputer scienceStimulus modalitySpeech recognitionPsychologyArtificial intelligenceCognitive psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective. To date, most research on electroencephalography (EEG)-based mental workload detection for passive brain-computer interface (pBCI) applications has focused on identifying the overall level of cognitive resources required, such as whether the workload is high or low. We propose, however, that being able to determine the specific type of cognitive resources being used, such as visual or auditory, would also be useful. This would enable the pBCI to take more appropriate action to reduce the overall level of cognitive demand on the user. For example, if a high level of workload was detected and it is determined that the user is primarily engaged in visual information processing, then the pBCI could cause some information to be presented aurally instead. In our previous work we showed that EEG could be used to differentiate visual from auditory processing tasks when the level of processing is high, but the two modalities could not be distinguished when the level of cognitive processing demand was very low. The current study aims to build on this work and move toward the overall objective of developing a pBCI that is capable of predicting both the level and the type of cognitive resources being used. Approach. Fifteen individuals undertook carefully designed visual and auditory tasks while their EEG data was being recorded. In this study, we incorporated a more diverse range of sensory processing conditions including not only single-modality conditions (i.e. those requiring one of either visual or auditory processing) as in our previous study, but also dual-modality conditions (i.e. those requiring both visual and auditory processing) and no-task/baseline conditions (i.e. when the individual is not engaged in either visual or auditory processing). Main results. Using regularized linear discriminant analysis within a hierarchical classification algorithm, the overall cognitive demand was predicted with an accuracy of more than 86%, while the presence or absence of visual and auditory sensory processing were each predicted with an accuracy of approximately 70%. Significance. The findings support the feasibility of establishing a pBCI that can determine both the level and type of attentional resources required by the user at any given moment. This pBCI could assist in enhancing safety in hazardous jobs by triggering the most effective and efficient adaptation strategies when high workload conditions are detected.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neural EngineeringSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207