“…Quantifying even the amount of variability in parameters has proven very difficult (Boehm et al, 2018;Ratcliff & Tuerlinckx, 2002) and only a handful of studies to date have attempted to quantify trial-to-trial variation in EAM parameters (Boehm et al, 2014;Gunawan et al, 2022;van Maanen et al, 2011) with some limiting factors (e.g., the full data set was required in advance). To-date, most applications of operator-state triggered adaptive automation have explored the use of wearable psycho-physiological monitoring technologies (e.g., ECG, EEG), but there is limited evidence for the diagnosticity and predictive power of physiological measures for workload estimation (Charles & Nixon, 2019), and thus it remains unclear the extent to which metrics hold practical or operational advantages in real world contexts (Kutilek et al, 2017;Wilson & Eggemeier, 2020). We argue that EAMs that can quantify the latent cognitive workload of a human operator would be a more natural solution in this space if appropriate models could be developed.…”