A comparison of task-related physiological responses in operators using EO/IR sensors or Night Vision Goggles to carry out air-to-ground search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Advanced Integrated Multi Sensor Surveillance (AIMS) electro-optical system and Night Vision Goggles (NVG) are both used to conduct a simulated airborne Search and Rescue (SAR) search task aboard NRC’s DHC-6 Twin Otter. The following is a case study comparing the psychological and physiological impacts associated with either form of search and rescue. Two operators performed detection/discrimination search tasks, alternating between AIMS and NVGs, over 11 flights. Subjective data, such as the Dundee Stress State Questionnaire (DSSQ) and Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) were collected both pre- and post-flight. Physiological data, including continuous Electrocardiography (ECG) and respiration, was collected throughout each flight. Heart Rate Variability (HRV) was derived from the ECG. Differences in metrics across tasks suggest that physiological arousal was significantly higher when performing the task with the AIMS system compared to performing the task with the NVGs for the two operators evaluated.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".