Evaluation of perceived urgency from single-trial EEG data elicited by upper-body vibration feedback using deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Notification systems that convey urgency without adding cognitive burden are crucial in human-computer interaction. Haptic feedback systems, particularly those utilizing vibration feedback, have emerged as a compelling solution, capable of providing desirable levels of urgency depending on the application. High-risk applications require an evaluation of the urgency level elicited during critical notifications. Traditional evaluations of perceived urgency rely on subjective self-reporting and performance metrics, which, while useful, are not real-time and can be distracting from the task at hand. In contrast, EEG technology offers a direct, non-intrusive method of assessing the user's cognitive state. Leveraging deep learning, this study introduces a novel approach to evaluate perceived urgency from single-trial EEG data, induced by vibration stimuli on the upper body, utilizing our newly collected urgency-via-vibration dataset. The proposed model combines a 2D convolutional neural network with a temporal convolutional network to capture spatial and temporal EEG features, outperforming several established EEG models. The proposed model achieves an average classification accuracy of 83% through leave-one-subject-out cross-validation across three urgency classes (not urgent, urgent, and very urgent) from a single trial of EEG data. Furthermore, explainability analysis showed that the prefrontal brain region, followed by the central brain region, are the most influential in predicting the urgency level. A follow-up neural statistical analysis revealed an increase in event-related synchronization (ERS) in the theta frequency band (4-7 Hz) with the increased level of urgency, which is associated with high arousal and attention in the neuroscience literature. A limitation of this study is that the proposed model's performance was tested only the urgency-via-vibration dataset, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".