Pilot Mental Workload Assessment Using fNIRS-Based Brain Effective Connectivity During Crosswind Approach and Landing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Excessive pilot mental workload during crosswind approach and landing affects pilots’ ability to maintain a stable approach and landing and may cause the aircraft to run off the runway. This paper reports a flight simulator study involving 24 cadet pilots with real flight experience. We used 38-channel noninvasive functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to collect the participates’ brain data. Subjective workload ratings and fNIRS data containing three hemoglobin signals, that is, changes in the concentration of oxyhemoglobin (ΔOxyHb), changes in the concentration of deoxyhemoglobin (ΔDeoxyHb), and changes in the concentration of total hemoglobin (ΔTotalHb), were collected from 48 approach and landing scenarios with and without crosswind. A total of 4,218 effective connectivity (EC) features were extracted from three hemoglobin signals across all sampling channels using Granger causality (GC). Statistical analysis was conducted on the subjective ratings and EC features, and EC features with absolute correlation coefficients greater than 0.2 were selected as inputs for the models. Combining TabNet and decision tree (DT), a stacking ensemble learning model (TabNet-DT) was established as a classifier for evaluating pilot mental workload and was compared with TabNet and DT. The results suggested that brain EC can be used to differentiate various levels of pilot mental workload and that ΔTotalHb was the most sensitive to pilot mental workload. Compared with the other models, TabNet-DT demonstrated superior performance, achieving 93.19% accuracy after selecting the combination of features of different hemoglobin signals. The findings from this study can contribute to improving flight safety during approach and landing.
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 | 0.001 | 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".