Research on effective recognition of alarm signals in a human–machine system based on cognitive neural experiments

References

• Parasuraman R. Neuroergonomics. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2007;20:181–186.
   Google Scholar
• Huang B, Qin Y. Man-machine-environment systems engineering research based mental workload measurement model of using soft ware. In: Sheng ZL, Balbir S, editors. Guilin, China; October 21st-24th, 2014; International Conference on Man-Machine-Environment System Engineering. Berlin: Springer; 2014; 10. p. 437–445.
   Google Scholar
• Kaber DB, Wright MC, Iii L, et al. Adaptive automation of human–machine system information-processing functions. Human Factors.2005;47(4):730.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou H, Sun S, Pan Y. Research on virtual human in ergonomic simulation. Comput Ind Eng. 2007;53(2):350–356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regina K, Heidi K. User interface pattern for AR in industrial applications. Information. 2021;12(6):251.
   Google Scholar
• Cté P, Gabrielle V, Cassidy JD, et al. The burden and determinants of neck pain in workers: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders. Spine. 2008;33:70–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao CF, Zhou XH. Preliminary study on theory of accident-causing based on safety information missing. World Sci-Tech R&D. 2012;34(1): 6–9.
   Google Scholar
• Karwowski W, Salvendy G. Advances in human factors, ergonomics, and safety in manufacturing and service industries. Boca Raton, FL: CRC; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Flumeri GD, Borghini G, Aricò P, et al. EEG-based mental workload neurometric to evaluate the impact of different traffic and road conditions in real driving settings. Front Hum Neurosci. 2018;12:509.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffmann MI, Fantoni PF, Nystad BH, et al. Pilot study of signal validation in an advanced alarm system–PEANO/COAST integration. Norway: Institutt for Energiteknikk Oecd Halden Reactor Project Halden; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Rygh K. Accident investigations – meeting the challenge of new technology. London: Springer; 2005. p. 58-60.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox SB. A human factors perspective: auditory alarm signals. Biomed Instrum Technol. 2011;45(4):284.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marche JH. Aircraft nacelle comprising a device providing a visual warning of a locking fault of the cowls. United States patent US 9,856,034. 2018. P.1–2.
   Google Scholar
• Foroogh H, Tingru Z, Ravi A, et al. Effectiveness of visual warnings on young drivers hazard anticipation and hazard mitigation abilities. Accid Anal Prev. 2018;116:41–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tonguc G, Hakkı Akcay I, Gurbuz H. Improvement of the visual warning system for various driving and road conditions in road transportation. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part D:J Automobile Eng. 2018;232(2):175–187.
   Google Scholar
• Wickens CD, Hollands JG, Banbury S, et al. Engineering psychology and human performance. New York: Psychology Press; 2015. p. 3–6.
   Google Scholar
• McKay KE, Halperin JM, Schwartz ST, et al. Developmental analysis of three aspects of information processing: sustained attention, selective attention, and response organization. Dev Neuropsychology. 1994;10(2):121–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paleček K, Gerónimo D, Lerasle F. Pre-attention cues for person detection. In: BertinoWen E, editor.Cognitive behavioural systems. Berlin: Springer; 2012. p. 225–235.
   Google Scholar
• Dade P. A dictionary of psychology. 3rd ed.. Ref Rev. 2010;24(1):20–21.
   Google Scholar
• Schroger E. On the detection of auditory deviations: a pre-attentive activation model. Psychophysiology. 1997;34(3):245–257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou D, Guo W, Huang H. Computer simulation-based designs for industrial engineering experiments. Sci J Appl Math Stat. 2018;6(3):74–80.
   Google Scholar
• Huang H, Yu H, Liu MQ, et al. Construction of uniform designs and complex-structured uniform designs via partitionable t-designs. Stat Sin. 2021;31:1689–1706.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang H. Multi-drug combination designs with experiments in silico. Stat Interface. 2021;14:373–388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards W. Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge, MA (USA): Cambridge University Press; 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Kvamme V. Use of behavioral theories for the interpretation of human behavior in the Costa Concordia disaster. Lund: LUTVDG/TVBB; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder-Hinrichs JU, Hollnagel E, Baldauf M. From titanic to Costa Concordia – a century of lessons not learned. Wmu J Maritime Affairs. 2012;11(2):151–167.
   Google Scholar
• Benetka G, Werbik H. Discussing cognitive neuroscience. Vienna: Springer Cham; 2021; 05–24.
   Google Scholar
• Parasuraman R, Christensen J, Grafton S. Neuroergonomics: the brain in action and at work. Neuroimage. 2012;59(1):1–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthew R, Ida L K. Eyes, brains, and autos. Arch Ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill.: 1960). 2004;122(4):641–647.
   Google Scholar
• Miguel AL N. Brain–machine interfaces to restore motor function and probe neural circuits. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2003;4(Suppl):417–422.
   Google Scholar
• Causse M, Dehais F, Peran P, et al. The effects of emotion on pilot decision-making: a neuroergonomic approach to aviation safety. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol. 2013;33(33):272–281.
   Google Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Guger C, Müller G, et al. Brain oscillations control hand orthosis in a tetraplegic. Neurosci Lett. 2000;292(3):211–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickens CD, Lee JD, Liu Y, et al. Introduction to human factors engineering. J Labelled Compd. 2013;11(4):393.
   Google Scholar
• Parasuraman R. Neuroergonomics: research and practice. Theor Issues Ergon Sci. 2003;4(1–2).
   Google Scholar
• Belopolsky AV, Kramer AF, Theeuwes J. The role of awareness in processing of oculomotor capture: evidence from event-related potentials. J Cognitive Neurosci. 2008;20(12):2285–2297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khodanovich MY, Esipenko EA, Svetlik MV, et al. A visual analog of mismatch negativity when stimuli differ in duration. Neurosci Behav Physiol. 2010;40(6):653–661.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Luck SJ. An introduction to the event-related potential technique. United States of America: MIT Press; 2014. p. 39.
   Google Scholar
• Näätänen R, Winkler I. The concept of auditory stimulus representation in cognitive neuroscience. Psychological Bull. 1999;125(6):826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czigler I, Winkler I. Unconscious memory representations in perception: processes and mechanisms in the brain. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2010. p. 107–131.
   Google Scholar
• Pazo-Alvarez P, Cadaveira F, Amenedo E. MMN in the visual modality: a review. Biol Psychology. 2003;63(3):199–236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czigler I, Balázs L, Winkler I. Memory-based detection of task-irrelevant visual changes. Psychophysiology. 2002;39(6):869–873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sulykos I, Czigler I. One plus one is less than two: visual features elicit non-additive mismatch-related brain activity. Brain Res. 2011;1398:64–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maekawa T, Tobimatsu S, Ogata K, et al. Preattentive visual change detection as reflected by the mismatch negativity (MMN) – evidence for a memory-based process. Neurosci Res. 2009;65(1):107–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czigler I, Winkler I, Pató L, et al. Visual temporal window of integration as revealed by the visual mismatch negativity event-related potential to stimulus omissions. Brain Res. 2006;1104(1):129–140.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kimura M, Widmann A, Schröger E. Human visual system automatically represents large-scale sequential regularities. Brain Res. 2010;1317:165–179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czigler I, Weisz J, Winkler I. ERPs and deviance detection: visual mismatch negativity to repeated visual stimuli. Neurosci Lett. 2006;401(1-2):178–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naatanen R, Paavilainen P, Rinne T, et al. The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: a review. Clin Neurophysiology. 2007;118(12):2544–2590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroger E. On the detection of auditory deviations: a pre-attentive activation model. Psychophysiology. 1997;34(3):245–257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czigler I, Balazs L, Pato LG. Visual change detection: event-related potentials are dependent on stimulus location in humans. Neurosci Lett. 2004;364(3):149–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vuust P, Brattico E, Glerean E, et al. New fast mismatch negativity paradigm for determining the neural prerequisites for musical ability. Cortex. 2011;47(9):1091–1098.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thonnessen H, Zvyagintsev M, Harke K C, et al. Optimized mismatch negativity paradigm reflects deficits in schizophrenia patients: a combined EEG and MEG study. Biol Psychology. 2008;77(2):205–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimura M, Katayama J, Ohira H, et al. Visual mismatch negativity: new evidence from the equiprobable paradigm. Psychophysiology. 2009;46(2):402–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qiu X, Yang X, Qiao Z, et al. Impairment in processing visual information at the pre-attentive stage in patients with a major depressive disorder: a visual mismatch negativity study. Neurosci Lett. 2011;491(1):53–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czigler I. Visual mismatch negativity: violation of nonattended environmental regularities. J Psychophysiology. 2007;21(3–4):224–230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarkoni T, Poldrack RA, Van Essen DC, et al. Cognitive neuroscience 2.0: building a cumulative science of human brain function. Trends Cogn Sci. 2010;14(11):489–496.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers AR, Hancock KE, Sen K, et al. Online stimulus optimization rapidly reveals multidimensional selectivity in auditory cortical neurons. J Neurosci. 2014;34(27):8963–8975.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang XY, Liao CJ. A multi-resource attention theory based model of human information processing. Dyn Continuous Discrete Impulsive Systems – Series B – Appl Algorithms. 2005;1:387–391.
   Google Scholar
• Guastello SJ. Human factors engineering and ergonomics. Boca Raton (FL): Taylor & Francis; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Czaja SJ, Nair SN. Human factors engineering and systems design. Handb Human Factors Ergon. 2012;4:38–56.
   Google Scholar
• Paas F, Van Gog T, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory: new conceptualizations, specifications, and integrated research perspectives. Educational Psychology Rev. 2010;22(2):115–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickens CD, Kramer A. Engineering psychology. Annu Rev Psychology. 1985;36(1):307–348.
   Google Scholar