A passive brain–computer interface application for the mental workload assessment on professional air traffic controllers during realistic air traffic control tasks
Abstract
In the last decades, it has been a fast-growing concept in the neuroscience field. The passive brain-computer interface (p-BCI) systems allow to improve the human-machine interaction (HMI) in operational environments, by using the covert brain activity (eg, mental workload) of the operator. However, p-BCI technology could suffer from some practical issues when used outside the laboratories. In particular, one of the most important limitations is the necessity to recalibrate the p-BCI system each time before its use, to avoid a significant reduction of its reliability in the detection of the considered mental states. The objective of the proposed study was to provide an example of p-BCIs used to evaluate the users' mental workload in a real operational environment. For this purpose, through the facilities provided by the École Nationale de l'Aviation Civile of Toulouse (France), the cerebral activity of 12 professional air traffic control officers (ATCOs) has been recorded while performing high realistic air traffic management scenarios. By the analysis of the ATCOs' brain activity (electroencephalographic signal-EEG) and the subjective workload perception (instantaneous self-assessment) provided by both the examined ATCOs and external air traffic control experts, it has been possible to estimate and evaluate the variation of the mental workload under which the controllers were operating. The results showed (i) a high significant correlation between the neurophysiological and the subjective workload assessment, and (ii) a high reliability over time (up to a month) of the proposed algorithm that was also able to maintain high discrimination accuracies by using a low number of EEG electrodes (~3 EEG channels). In conclusion, the proposed methodology demonstrated the suitability of p-BCI systems in operational environments and the advantages of the neurophysiological measures with respect to the subjective ones.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
EEG features in the time domain (P300 ERPs) and frequency domain (EEG frequency bands) are modulated by difficulty of task variations.
“Through EEG measures, we extracted features (i) in the time domain (i.e., ERPs analysis, in particular P300 ERPs) and (ii) in the frequency domain (i.e., EEG frequency bands), both modulated the difficulty of the task variations32–34.”
From The impact of multisensory integration and perceptual load in virtual reality settings on performance, workload and presence (2021) · cites this paper as [32]
Once trained with calibration data, the asSWLDA algorithm can compute a workload index on other data by combining selected EEG features with model weights.
“Once trained with specific “calibration data”, the algorithm can be used to compute a workload index (i.e., WEEG index) on other data by combining the selected EEG features with specific weights in output from the model itself.”
From The impact of multisensory integration and perceptual load in virtual reality settings on performance, workload and presence (2021) · cites this paper as [32]
The asSWLDA algorithm has been validated and successfully employed for EEG-based workload assessment in operational environments such as air traffic management and car driving.
“This algorithm has been already validated and successfully employed for EEG-based workload assessment in operational environments, such as air traffic management31 and car driving32.”
From The impact of multisensory integration and perceptual load in virtual reality settings on performance, workload and presence (2021) · cites this paper as [32]
Cites
Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research
(1988) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 · Cited by 15,003 · see citing works
A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact
Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., & Donchin, E. (1983) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/0013-4694(83)90135-9 · Cited by 5,055 · see citing works
N-back working memory paradigm: a meta-analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies.
Owen, A. M., McMillan, K. M., Laird, A. R., & Bullmore, E. (2005) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.20131 · Cited by 3,560 · see citing works
The Berlin Brain–Computer Interface: Non-Medical Uses of BCI Technology
Blankertz, B., Tangermann, M., Vidaurre, C., Fazli, S., Sannelli, C., Haufe, S., Maeder, C., Ramsey, L., Sturm, I., Curio, G., et al. (2010) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2010.00198 · Cited by 357 · see citing works
Aricò, P., Aloise, F., Schettini, F., Salinari, S., Mattia, D., & Cincotti, F. (2014) · Journal of Neural Engineering · doi:10.1088/1741-2560/11/3/035008 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Harrison, J., Izzetoglu, K., Ayaz, H., Willems, B., Hah, S., Ahlstrom, U., Woo, H., Shewokis, P. A., Bunce, S. C., & Onaral, B. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems · doi:10.1109/thms.2014.2319822 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Human Mental Workload: A Survey and a Novel Inclusive Definition
Longo, L., Wickens, C. D., Hancock, G., & Hancock, P. A. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.883321 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
Marucci, M., Di Flumeri, G., Borghini, G., Sciaraffa, N., Scandola, M., Pavone, E. F., Babiloni, F., Betti, V., & Aricò, P. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-84196-8 · Cited by 170 · see citing works
Self-citationBenchmarking Brain-Computer Interfaces Outside the Laboratory: The Cybathlon 2016
Novak, D., Sigrist, R., Gerig, N. J., Wyss, D., Bauer, R., Götz, U., & Riener, R. (2018) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2017.00756 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
- Authors
- Aricò, P., Borghini, G., Di Flumeri, G., Colosimo, A., Pozzi, S., & Babiloni, F.
- Affiliations
- Fondazione Santa Lucia (IT)
- Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
- Deep Blue (Italy) (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Babiloni, F.
- Venue
- Progress in Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Published
- 2016
- Volume
- 228
- Pages
- 295-328
- ISSN
- 0079-6123 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2411256484
- Cited by
- 145
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 37.61
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Progress in brain research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
- Keywords
- passive brain-computer interface, mental workload assessment, air traffic controllers, EEG
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Analysis of Variance, Aviation, Brain, Electroencephalography, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Self-Assessment, Task Performance and Analysis, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Workload, Signal Detection, Psychological, Brain-Computer Interfaces
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review