Towards Generalizable Drowsiness Monitoring with Physiological Sensors: A Preliminary Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurately detecting drowsiness is vital to driving safety. Among different measures, physiological-signal-based drowsiness monitoring can be more privacy-preserving than a camera-based approach. However, conflicts exist regarding how physiological metrics are associated with different drowsiness labels across datasets, which might reduce the generalizability of data-driven models trained with multiple datasets. Thus, we analyzed key features from electrocardiograms (ECG), electrodermal activity (EDA), and respiratory (RESP) signals across four datasets, where different drowsiness inducers (such as fatigue and low arousal) and assessment methods (subjective vs. objective) were used. Binary logistic regression models were built to identify the physiological metrics that are associated with drowsiness. Findings indicate that distinct drowsiness inducers can lead to different physiological responses, and objective assessments were more sensitive than subjective ones in detecting drowsiness. Further, decreased heart rate stability, respiratory amplitude, and tonic EDA are robustly associated with increased drowsiness. These results enhance the understanding of drowsiness detection and can inform future generalizable monitoring designs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".