2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.bspc.2022.103623
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Machine learning-based approach for identifying mental workload of pilots

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To verify the representativeness and credibility of the mental workload classification model established by SVM, the same classification factors as SVM1 and SVM2, respectively, were reclassified according to the same classification order using KNN. The results indicated that all SVM evaluation indexes were higher than those of KNN, which was consistent with the findings of Mohanavelu et al (22); the was probably because SVM outperformed KNN provided the sample size was not small (34). For the SVM hierarchical combination classifier, all evaluation indexes of SVM2 were higher than SVM1, probably because the second layer of the classifier had more classification factors than the first, which might also explain why the accuracy of KNN2 was higher than KNN1.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To verify the representativeness and credibility of the mental workload classification model established by SVM, the same classification factors as SVM1 and SVM2, respectively, were reclassified according to the same classification order using KNN. The results indicated that all SVM evaluation indexes were higher than those of KNN, which was consistent with the findings of Mohanavelu et al (22); the was probably because SVM outperformed KNN provided the sample size was not small (34). For the SVM hierarchical combination classifier, all evaluation indexes of SVM2 were higher than SVM1, probably because the second layer of the classifier had more classification factors than the first, which might also explain why the accuracy of KNN2 was higher than KNN1.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Chen et al analyzed the sensitivity of the pilot’s EEG and physiological factors under different flight tasks, and established a pilot workload evaluation model based on SVM ( 21 ). Mohanavelu et al employed an SVM classifier to effectively identify the pilots’ cognitive workload level during takeoff, cruise, and landing phases with ECG and EEG ( 22 ). Thus, the current study selected SVM to establish the mental workload classifier.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…35 ST articles were found [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 ]. In this context, the simulation of a flight task enables the control of experimental stimuli, such as the addition of engine failures (e.g., [ 43 ]), turbulence (e.g., [ 35 ]) or visibility setting (e.g., [ 30 ]).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Objective assessment was employed in 30 ST articles [29][30][31][32][33][34]36,[38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][47][48][49][50][51][52][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62] and in 9 RF articles [68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76]. As a result of the analysis of these studies, the performed objective measures, the calculated parameters, and the employed instrumentation are summarized in Table 1.…”
Section: Objective Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proposed convolution attention memory network (CAMNN) model outperforms to the previously used method with an accuracy of 92%. Mohanavelu et al [70] used different machine learning approaches to identify the mental workload of the flight pilots during different phases of flight, i.e., takeoff, landing, etc. Using EEG features, the cognitive workload was classified, and the LDA performed better than the other two methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%