MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402423703 · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103366

A gaze-based driver distraction countermeasure: Comparing effects of multimodal alerts on driver's behavior and visual attention

2024· article· en· W4402423703 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Human-Computer Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDistractionGazeCountermeasureComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionEye trackingPsychologyCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study, introduces and evaluates different countermeasures using real-time eye-tracking data. The countermeasures detect when driver gaze deviates from the road for longer than a predetermined threshold and then redirect the driver's attention back to the road. The countermeasures include bimodal and trimodal alerts using combinations of auditory, tactile, and visual modalities. These countermeasures showcase the utility of adopting eye-tracking technologies in the context of driver monitoring and advanced driver's assistance systems. They enhance safety as a safeguard for the increased use of devices such as in-vehicle infotainment systems. Results show that countermeasures effectively redirect drivers’ attention to the road, with higher on-road gaze time. Additionally, bimodal alerts that include the visual modality are less effective at redirecting participants’ gaze on-road and result in poorer driving performance.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.376 · 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