MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396860186 · doi:10.1007/s42154-023-00252-1

Prefrontal Correlates of Passengers’ Mental Activity Based on fNIRS for High-Level Automated Vehicles

2024· article· en· W4396860186 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaofei Zhang, Chuzhao Li, Jun Li, Bin Cao, Junwen Fu, Qiaoya Wang, Hong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueAutomotive Innovation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPsychologyPrefrontal cortexComputer scienceCognitive psychologyNeuroscienceCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With the spread adoption of artificial intelligence, the great challenges confronted by the intelligent safety concern-safety of the intended functionality has become the biggest roadblock to the mass production of high-level automated vehicles, notably arising from perception algorithm deficiencies. This paper focuses a cut-in scenario, dividing this scenario into low-risk and high-risk segments predicated on the kinetic energy field, and the mental activities of passengers on prefrontal cortex, are analyzed within these delineated segments. Two experiments are then conducted, leveraging driving simulators and real-world vehicles, respectively. Experiment results indicate that high risk may result in the passengers’ mental activity on prefrontal cortex change. This revelation posits a potential avenue for augmenting the intended functionality of automated vehicle by using passengers’ physiological state.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutomotive InnovationSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207