MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408917650 · doi:10.1109/tcds.2025.3555517

CLARE: Cognitive Load Assessment in Real-Time With Multimodal Data

2025· article· en· W4408917650 on OpenAlexaff
Anubhav Bhatti, Prithila Angkan, Behnam Behinaein, Zunayed Mahmud, Dirk Rodenburg, Heather Braund, P. James Mclellan, Aaron J. Ruberto, G. L. Abby Harrison, D G Wilson, Adam Szulewski, Dan Howes, Ali Etemad, Paul Hungler

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitionCognitive loadHuman–computer interactionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a novel multimodal dataset for cognitive load assessment in real-time (CLARE). The dataset contains physiological and gaze data from 24 participants with self-reported cognitive load scores as ground-truth labels. The dataset consists of four modalities, namely, electrocardiography (ECG), electrodermal activity (EDA), electroencephalogram (EEG), and gaze tracking. To map diverse levels of mental load on participants during experiments, each participant completed four 9-min sessions on a computer-based operator performance and mental workload task (the MATB-II software) with varying levels of complexity in 1 min segments. During the experiment, participants reported their cognitive load every 10 s. For the dataset, we also provide benchmark binary classification results with machine learning and deep learning models on two different evaluation schemes, namely, 10-fold and leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) cross-validation. Benchmark results show that for 10-fold evaluation, the convolutional neural network (CNN) based deep learning model achieves the best classification performance with ECG, EDA, and gaze. In contrast, for LOSO, the best performance is achieved by the deep learning model with ECG, EDA, and EEG.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental SystemsSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207