2022
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12101416
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling Cognitive Load as a Self-Supervised Brain Rate with Electroencephalography and Deep Learning

Abstract: The principal reason for measuring mental workload is to quantify the cognitive cost of performing tasks to predict human performance. Unfortunately, a method for assessing mental workload that has general applicability does not exist yet. This is due to the abundance of intuitions and several operational definitions from various fields that disagree about the sources or workload, its attributes, the mechanisms to aggregate these into a general model and their impact on human performance. This research built u… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 78 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While the test–rest approach is valid to prove the stability of results, especially in longitudinal studies, it is not the most suitable test to assess the impact of pre-processing on quantitative estimation when repeated measurements are not provided. In this context, a series of papers have been recently published in which the performances of machine learning approaches to classify the MWL level after different signal pre-processing pipelines were compared [ 36 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 ]. These works are focused only on the automatic classification accuracy, considering several features extracted from all the EEG frequency bands and electrode signals, e.g., ERP, as input to the algorithm, whereas any direct evaluation of the EEG features extracted is provided.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the test–rest approach is valid to prove the stability of results, especially in longitudinal studies, it is not the most suitable test to assess the impact of pre-processing on quantitative estimation when repeated measurements are not provided. In this context, a series of papers have been recently published in which the performances of machine learning approaches to classify the MWL level after different signal pre-processing pipelines were compared [ 36 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 ]. These works are focused only on the automatic classification accuracy, considering several features extracted from all the EEG frequency bands and electrode signals, e.g., ERP, as input to the algorithm, whereas any direct evaluation of the EEG features extracted is provided.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent years, deep learning methods have been developed to detect various neurological disorders that utilize EEG signals [15], [75] and solve various classification tasks [76], [77], [78]. Although these methods work well in finding hidden features and patterns from the nonlinear data, they struggle to attain higher-classification accuracy on EEG due to the data being highly complex and the frequent non-cerebral contamination that accompanies it [61], [62]. Cortically generated EEG is often contaminated by non-cerebral artifact origins such as eye blinks, ocular movements, Electrocardiogram (ECG), and Electromyogram (EMG) artifacts.…”
Section: B Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A study investigating prefrontal cortex (PFC) hemodynamics using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) while performing n-back and random number generation (RNG) tasks with multiple cognitive loads suggested a relationship between subjective workload and brain activity [ 7 ]. In attempting to quantify the cognitive load, cognitive load modeling techniques using deep learning are also being studied, considering workload mechanisms and their impact on human performance [ 8 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%