Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Harsh cabins in mining, construction, and defense degrade touch human–machine inter- faces for secondary tasks, while single-modality contactless input stays fragile under coupled noise and vibration. A sequenced tri-modal protocol with dwell locking, head confirma- tion or cancellation, and optional voice refinement is specified and evaluated in a desktop Wizard-of-Oz browser under parameterized disturbance. An operator survey (N = 48) fixed timing constants; N = 30 participants compared touch (A), pooled single-modality contact- less (B), and tri-modal (C) under a fixed Hard preset. Holm–Bonferroni contrasts show C reduced error rate and NASA–TLX versus B (p <.01), shortened completion time versus B (p <.05), and improved SUS versus B, while A remained fastest with the lowest descriptive errors. Conclusions are interaction-level evidence under simulation, not ISO-calibrated cabin equivalence or production gaze or speech benchmarks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhenghao Yu (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: