| Literature DB >> 33267496 |
Abhishek Tiwari1, Isabela Albuquerque1, Mark Parent1, Jean-François Gagnon2, Daniel Lafond2, Sébastien Tremblay3, Tiago H Falk1.
Abstract
Mental workload assessment is crucial in many real life applications which require constant attention and where imbalance of mental workload resources may cause safety hazards. As such, mental workload and its relationship with heart rate variability (HRV) have been well studied in the literature. However, the majority of the developed models have assumed individuals are not ambulant, thus bypassing the issue of movement-related electrocardiography (ECG) artifacts and changing heart beat dynamics due to physical activity. In this work, multi-scale features for mental workload assessment of ambulatory users is explored. ECG data was sampled from users while they performed different types and levels of physical activity while performing the multi-attribute test battery (MATB-II) task at varying difficulty levels. Proposed features are shown to outperform benchmark ones and further exhibit complementarity when used in combination. Indeed, results show gains over the benchmark HRV measures of 24.41 % in accuracy and of 27.97 % in F1 score can be achieved even at high activity levels.Entities:
Keywords: HRV; SVM; mental workload; motif; multi-scale entropy; permutation entropy
Year: 2019 PMID: 33267496 PMCID: PMC7515312 DOI: 10.3390/e21080783
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Figure 1Experimental setup for both bike and treadmill conditions.
Figure 2Multi-attribute task battery (MATB-II) game for eliciting different levels of mental workload.
Benchmark heart rate variability (HRV) features extracted.
|
|
| mean, standard deviation, coefficient of variation, rmsdd, pNN50, mean of 1st diff., standard deviation of absolute of 1st diff., normalized mean of absolute 1st diff |
|
|
| High frequency power (HF), normalized HF, Low frequency power (LF), normalized LF, very low frequency power, HF/LF |
Different scaling and entropy algorithms used.
| Scaling Algorithms | Entropy Algorithms |
|---|---|
| Coarse graining ( | Sample Entropy |
| moving average ( | Modified Permutation Entropy |
| second moment | Weighted Modified Permutation Entropy |
| moving average | |
| composite coarse graining ( |
Figure 3Scaled inter-beat interval (RR) time series with the moving average algorithm for scales (original series) to .
Figure 4Scaled RR time series with the second moment moving average algorithm for scales to .
Figure 5Original motifs of degree appearing in a time series.
Figure 6Performance comparison for the no physical activity condition.
Figure 7Performance comparison for the medium physical activity condition.
Figure 8Performance comparison for the high physical activity condition.
Performance of fused and scaling with algorithm for different physical workload levels (* represents cases which perform significantly better than chance).
| Physical Activity Level | Acc | F1 |
|---|---|---|
| No | 0.7893 ± 0.0122 * | 0.7886 ± 0.0131 * |
| Medium | 0.7726 ± 0.0114 * | 0.7701 ± 0.0111 * |
| High | 0.6741 ± 0.0150 * | 0.6698 ± 0.0164 * |
Benchmark performance comparison for the no physical activity condition (* represents cases which perform significantly better than chance).
| Feature (Nof) | Acc | F1 |
|---|---|---|
| benchmark (15) | 0.5772 ± 0.0192 * | 0.4991 ± 0.0206 |
| 0.7838 ± 0.0137 * | 0.7882 ± 0.0137 * | |
| multi-scale entropy (48) | 0.7893 ± 0.0122 * | 0.7886 ± 0.0131 * |
| fused (129) | 0.8438 ± 0.0126 * | 0.8428 ± 0.0132 * |
Benchmark performance comparison for the medium physical activity condition (* represents cases which perform significantly better than chance).
| Feature (Nof) | Acc | F1 |
|---|---|---|
| benchmark (15) | 0.5318 ± 0.0169 * | 0.6019 ± 0.0231 * |
| 0.8189 ± 0.0133 * | 0.8203 ± 0.0134 * | |
| multi-scale entropy (48) | 0.7726 ± 0.0114 * | 0.7701 ± 0.0111 * |
| fused (129) | 0.8401 ± 0.0128 * | 0.8410 ± 0.0129 * |
Benchmark performance comparison for the high physical activity condition (* represents cases which perform significantly better than chance).
| Feature (Nof) | Acc | F1 |
|---|---|---|
| benchmark (15) | 0.5751 ± 0.0160 * | 0.5393 ± 0.0245 * |
| 0.7825 ± 0.0128 * | 0.7818 ± 0.0137 * | |
| multi-scale entropy (48) | 0.6741 ± 0.0150 * | 0.6698 ± 0.0164 * |
| fused (129) | 0.8015 ± 0.0152 * | 0.7987 ± 0.0156 * |
Most frequently occurring features in the top-20 feature pool for the no physical activity condition.
| Feature Name |
|
|---|---|
| mean of RR | 99.2 |
| 98.8 | |
| 98.4 | |
| Coefficient of variation | 93.2 |
| lf/hf | 82.8 |
| std. absolute first difference RR | 81.2 |
| mean | 80 |
| 70.4 |
Most frequently occurring features in the top-20 feature pool for the medium physical activity condition.
| Feature Name |
|
|---|---|
| 99.2 | |
| 99.2 | |
| 98 | |
| mean RR | 95.2 |
| 91.2 | |
| 89.6 | |
| 88.8 | |
| 83.2 | |
| 81.6 | |
| 74.4 | |
| 74.4 | |
| 70.4 |
Most frequently occurring features in the top-20 feature pool for the high physical activity condition.
| Feature Name |
|
|---|---|
| mean abs. first difference RR | 100 |
| 96 | |
| lfnu | 95.2 |
| 93.6 | |
| hfnu | 90.8 |
| 90.8 | |
| 84.8 | |
| 79.6 | |
| 79.6 | |
| 70.8 |