PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 6, 2026Sensors1 citationsOpen Access

Consumer-Grade Wearable Sensors for Classifying Pilot Workload and Stress During Real Flight Training: A Leave-One-Subject-Out Validation Study

View Full Paper
RXRongbing XuSCShi CaoMBMichael Barnett‐Cowan

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Consumer-grade wearable sensors may enable continuous monitoring of pilot workload and stress during flight training, yet most prior studies rely on simulators, raw-score labelling, and within-subject validation, limiting generalisability. This study evaluates whether electrodermal activity (EDA), electrocardiogram (ECG)-derived features, and wrist skin temperature, recorded from an Empatica Embrace Plus and a Polar H10 during real Cessna 172 flight training, can classify pilots’ task-relative workload and stress deviations. Thirty-five pilots completed four flight segments and rated workload and stress after each. Fold-safe two-way residual binary labels removed inter-pilot scale-use differences and task-level effects, and five classifiers were evaluated under leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) cross-validation with Benjamini–Hochberg FDR correction. Under LOSO, a Linear SVC on combined features classified stress (macro F1 = 0.607) and XGBoost on EDA classified workload (macro F1 = 0.598) significantly above chance (padj=0.033); both remained stable under nested cross-validation with an inner hyperparameter search (nested 0.606 and 0.561). A LightGBM model on EDA gave a numerically higher stress score (0.611) that did not survive nested validation. Subject-dependent within-subject validation produced higher apparent performance (macro F1 = 0.853 for stress and 0.791 for workload), but a stricter within-pilot analysis was unstable. These contrasts indicate that personalised classification may be feasible after calibration, whereas uncalibrated cross-pilot prediction in real flight remains modest, with post-flight debriefing the most plausible near-term application.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Xu et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a28ed69d978e24f5d251850https://doi.org/10.3390/s26123627
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Reliability of Ultra-Short-Term Analysis as a Surrogate of Standard 5-Min Analysis of Heart Rate Variability2015 · 317 citations
  2. 2Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research1988 · 14,752 citations
  3. 3Integrating physiological monitoring systems in military aviation: a brief narrative review of its importance, opportunities, and risks2023 · 35 citations
  4. 4A Global Measure of Perceived Stress1983 · 33,076 citations
  5. 5Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers.1999 · 2,717 citations