The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Predicting Air Traffic Controller Workload from Eye-Tracking Data with Machine Learning
Abstract
In this paper, we examine the feasibility of assessing air traffic controller (ATCO) workload using non-intrusive eye-tracking measures and machine learning algorithms. A total of N = 18 ATCOs participated in simulator runs with tasks inducing three task-load levels: light, moderate, and heavy. Task load was modulated through traffic load and the associated increase in complexity. We collected eye-tracking data (statistical summaries of which serve as features) and obtained subjective workload assessments using self-reported Cooper-Harper Scale scores, which act as label variables. We evaluate the performance of eight classical machine learning models, with the k-nearest neighbors and support vector classifier models emerging as the most promising. To optimize performance, we apply feature selection techniques, focusing on these best-performing models. Feature selection via recursive feature elimination (RFE) based on permutation importance reduces the original 42 features while maintaining or improving performance. The outcomes yield promising results in workload-level estimation, achieving an F1 score of 0.870 for low/high workload prediction and an F1 score of 0.788 for predicting three different levels of workload. The RFE process identifies optimal feature sets ranging from 7 to 13 features for different tasks, with minimal impact on performance. A “knee point” is observed, representing the optimal balance between model performance and dimensionality. Adding more features beyond this point contributes little to performance improvement while increasing model complexity. These findings indicate that even a few features can be sufficient for accurate workload prediction. We show that head-movement features provide valuable information. Comparable performance is achieved using only ocular features, but this requires more features. Asymmetry in left and right eye metrics holds workload-related information but transforming them into averages and differences reduces performance. Retaining the original features separately is the most effective approach, incorporating their absolute differences may provide slight benefits in certain models.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Lemetti, A., Meyer, L., Peukert, M., Polishchuk, T., Schmidt, C., & Alpfjord Wylde, H.
- Venue
- Journal of Open Aviation Science
- Publisher
- TU Delft OPEN Publishing
- Published
- 2025-12-18
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2773-1626
- Cited by
- 2
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predicting Air Traffic Controller Workload from Eye-Tracking Data with Machine Learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.59490/joas.2025.8034
- The paper
- Lemetti, A., Meyer, L., Peukert, M., Polishchuk, T., Schmidt, C., & Alpfjord Wylde, H. (2025). Predicting Air Traffic Controller Workload from Eye-Tracking Data with Machine Learning. Journal of Open Aviation Science. https://doi.org/10.59490/joas.2025.8034