An Integrated Electroencephalography and Eye-Tracking Analysis Using eXtreme Gradient Boosting for Mental Workload Evaluation in Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective We aimed to develop advanced machine learning models using electroencephalogram (EEG) and eye-tracking data to predict the mental workload associated with engaging in various surgical tasks. Background Traditional methods of evaluating mental workload often involve self-report scales, which are subject to individual biases. Due to the multidimensional nature of mental workload, there is a pressing need to identify factors that contribute to mental workload across different surgical tasks. Method EEG and eye-tracking data from 26 participants performing Matchboard and Ring Walk tasks from the da Vinci simulator and the pattern cut and suturing tasks from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) program were used to develop an eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) model for mental workload evaluation. Results The developed XGBoost models demonstrated strong predictive performance with R 2 values of 0.82, 0.81, 0.82, and 0.83 for the Matchboard, Ring Walk, pattern cut, and suturing tasks, respectively. Key features for predicting mental workload included task average pupil diameter, complexity level, average functional connectivity strength at the temporal lobe, and the total trajectory length of the nondominant eye’s pupil. Integrating features from both EEG and eye-tracking data significantly enhanced the performance of mental workload evaluation models, as evidenced by repeated-measures t-tests yielding p -values less than 0.05. However, this enhancement was not observed in the Pattern Cut task (repeated-measures t-tests; p > 0.05). Conclusion The findings underscore the potential for machine learning and multidimensional feature integration to predict mental workload and thereby improve task design and surgical training. Application The advanced mental workload prediction models could serve as instrumental tools to enhance our understanding of surgeons’ cognitive demands and significantly improve the effectiveness of surgical training programs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".