Key result
Three different levels of mental load could be classified with an f1-score of 0.713 using skin conductance and respiration signals, and subjective workload was predicted with a mean absolute error of 3.195.
Why the study?
Performing non-driving-related tasks could degrade takeover performance in conditionally automated driving, which might be detected through continuous assessment of drivers' mental load.
Effect estimate: f1-score 0.713; MAE 3.195
Physiological indicators such as respiratory sinus arrhythmia, respiratory amplitude, and temporal indices of heart rate variability can reliably assess mental workload during conditionally automated driving.
May facilitate objective mental workload monitoring; hypothesis-generating for cardiovascular applications pending validation.
In future conditionally automated driving, drivers may be asked to take over control of the car while it is driving autonomously. Performing a non-driving-related task could degrade their takeover performance, which could be detected by continuous assessment of drivers' mental load. In this regard, three physiological signals from 80 subjects were collected during 1 h of conditionally automated driving in a simulator. Participants were asked to perform a non-driving cognitive task (N-back) for 90 s, 15 times during driving. The modality and difficulty of the task were experimentally manipulated. The experiment yielded a dataset of drivers' physiological indicators during the task sequences, which was used to predict drivers' workload. This was done by classifying task difficulty (three classes) and regressing participants' reported level of subjective workload after each task (on a 0–20 scale). Classification of task modality was also studied. For each task, the effect of sensor fusion and task performance were studied. The implemented pipeline consisted of a repeated cross validation approach with grid search applied to three machine learning algorithms. The results showed that three different levels of mental load could be classified with a f1-score of 0.713 using the skin conductance and respiration signals as inputs of a random forest classifier. The best regression model predicted the subjective level of workload with a mean absolute error of 3.195 using the three signals. The accuracy of the model increased with participants' task performance. However, classification of task modality (visual or auditory) was not successful. Some physiological indicators such as estimates of respiratory sinus arrhythmia, respiratory amplitude, and temporal indices of heart rate variability were found to be relevant measures of mental workload. Their use should be preferred for ongoing assessment of driver workload in automated driving.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meteier et al. (2022) studied Mental workload in conditionally automated driving (n=80). Non-driving cognitive task (N-back) difficulty and modality vs. No task was evaluated on Classification of task difficulty (three classes) and regression of subjective workload (f1-score 0.713; MAE 3.195). Three different levels of mental load could be classified with an f1-score of 0.713 using skin conductance and respiration signals, and subjective workload was predicted with a mean absolute error of 3.195.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: