ArticlePloS one2018
Human-centric predictive model of task difficulty for human-in-the-loop control tasks.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward Correcting Anxious Movements Using Haptic Cues on the Da Vinci Surgical Robot.Proceedings of the ... IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics. IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics · 2022Article
- Analytical-stochastic model of motor difficulty for three-dimensional manipulation tasks.PloS one · 2022Article
- Rethinking Autonomous Surgery: Focusing on Enhancement over Autonomy.European urology focus · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Quantitatively measuring the difficulty of a manipulation task in human-in-the-loop control systems is ill-defined. Currently, systems are typically evaluated through task-specific performance measures and post-experiment user surveys; however, these methods do not capture the real-time experience of human users. In this study, we propose to analyze and predict the difficulty of a bivariate pointing task, with a haptic device interface, using human-centric measurement data in terms of cognition, physical effort, and motion kinematics. Noninvasive sensors were used to record the multimodal response of human user for 14 subjects performing the task. A data-driven approach for predicting task difficulty was implemented based on several task-independent metrics. We compare four possible models for predicting task difficulty to evaluated the roles of the various types of metrics, including: (I) a movement time model, (II) a fusion model using both physiological and kinematic metrics, (III) a model only with kinematic metrics, and (IV) a model only with physiological metrics. The results show significant correlation between task difficulty and the user sensorimotor response. The fusion model, integrating user physiology and motion kinematics, provided the best estimate of task difficulty (R2 = 0.927), followed by a model using only kinematic metrics (R2 = 0.921). Both models were better predictors of task difficulty than the movement time model (R2 = 0.847), derived from Fitt's law, a well studied difficulty model for human psychomotor control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.