ArticleScientific reports2025
Automatic detection of cognitive events using machine learning and understanding models' interpretations of human cognition.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cognitive biotypes identified through ECG-derived workload and behavioral accuracy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pupillary response is a valuable indicator of cognitive workload, capturing fluctuations in attention and arousal governed by the autonomic nervous system. Cognitive events, defined as the initiation of mental processes, are closely linked to cognitive workload as they trigger cognitive responses. In this study, we detect cognitive events for the task-evoked pupillary response across four domains (vigilance, emotion processing, numerical reasoning, and short-term memory). The problem is framed as a binary classification. We train one generalized model and four task-specific models on 1-s pupil diameter and gaze position segments. Five models achieve MCC between 0.43 and 0.75. We report three key findings: (1) the generalized model reduces the specificity to enhance the sensitivity, illustrating the trade-off from specialization to generalization; (2) the permutation feature importance analyses show that both pupil dilation and gaze position contribute to model predictions, with task-specific models focusing on task-specific structure patterns to predict while the generalized model is using human cognitive responses; and (3) in an online simulation environment, models performance decreases by approximately 0.05 on MCC. The findings highlight the potential of machine learning applied to pupillary signals for rapid, individualized detection of cognitive events.
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.