↓ Skip to main content

Multisubject “Learning” for Mental Workload Classification Using Concurrent EEG, fNIRS, and Physiological Measures

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
175 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Multisubject “Learning” for Mental Workload Classification Using Concurrent EEG, fNIRS, and Physiological Measures
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00389
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yichuan Liu, Hasan Ayaz, Patricia A. Shewokis

Abstract

An accurate measure of mental workload level has diverse neuroergonomic applications ranging from brain computer interfacing to improving the efficiency of human operators. In this study, we integrated electroencephalogram (EEG), functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), and physiological measures for the classification of three workload levels in an n-back working memory task. A significantly better than chance level classification was achieved by EEG-alone, fNIRS-alone, physiological alone, and EEG+fNIRS based approaches. The results confirmed our previous finding that integrating EEG and fNIRS significantly improved workload classification compared to using EEG-alone or fNIRS-alone. The inclusion of physiological measures, however, does not significantly improves EEG-based or fNIRS-based workload classification. A major limitation of currently available mental workload assessment approaches is the requirement to record lengthy calibration data from the target subject to train workload classifiers. We show that by learning from the data of other subjects, workload classification accuracy can be improved especially when the amount of data from the target subject is small.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 175 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 23%
Student > Master 19 11%
Researcher 18 10%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 22 13%
Unknown 51 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 44 25%
Computer Science 15 9%
Neuroscience 15 9%
Psychology 11 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 5%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 65 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 November 2018.
All research outputs
#6,678,515
of 24,024,220 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,675
of 7,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,067
of 320,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#62
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,024,220 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,403 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.