Next Article in Journal
Impact of Fatigue on Ergonomic Risk Scores and Foot Kinetics: A Field Study Employing Inertial and In-Shoe Plantar Pressure Measurement Devices
Previous Article in Journal
A Hybrid System for Defect Detection on Rail Lines through the Fusion of Object and Context Information
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

EEG Dataset Collection for Mental Workload Predictions in Flight-Deck Environment

Sensors 2024, 24(4), 1174; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24041174
by Aura Hernández-Sabaté 1,2,*, José Yauri 1, Pau Folch 2, Daniel Álvarez 3 and Debora Gil 1,2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Sensors 2024, 24(4), 1174; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24041174
Submission received: 24 December 2023 / Revised: 26 January 2024 / Accepted: 5 February 2024 / Published: 10 February 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Wearables)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for his/her time and advice. Attached there are our replies.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors Demographic information could be more consistently presented across all groups of participants (age and gender are missing for some). In line 459, authors provide an explanation of lower correlation strength with the most difficult flight, however, references supporting their explanation are missing. Capability of task transfer (Figure 19) should be explained in greater detail. The abbreviations BL and WL are not explained, and It is not clear how the authors obtained their results, making the Figure 19 difficult to interpret. Currently used figures seem to have low resolution and are thus difficult to read. Comments on the Quality of English Language While the ideas in the manuscript are interesting and well presented, there are several areas where improvement in the English language could enhance the overall readability of the manuscript. The authors should conduct a thorough proofread to catch and correct the typographical and grammatical errors, as well as the repetitions in the manuscript.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for his/her time and advice. Attached there are our replies.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Technically, the data presentation, method explanations, and analysis are weak. The references seem old. There are newer studies on stress analysis based on simultaneous ECG and EEG monitoring. The manuscript does not explain how they correlate EEG and ECC features. More than that, it does not even explain what ECG and EEG features (only alpha, beta, and gamma are mentioned) were used. The literature review is not sufficient, for example, what EEG and ECG features were used in relation to stress or workload in the past? There are well known features. In terms of data presentation, tables would be useful for understanding the results, not just graphs. The machine learning part lacks information on how the training was performed. What percentage of data was used for training and testing? Do the results refer to testing data only?

Typo: Line 113 and Line 11: hearth rate, change to heart rate

In correct reference Repetition: Hernández-Sabaté, A.; Yauri, J.; Folch, P.; Piera, M.À.; Gil, D. Recognition of the Mental Workloads of Pilots in the Cockpit Using 585 EEG Signals. Applied Sciences 2022, Vol. 12, Page 2298 2022, 12, 2298. https://doi.org/10.3390/APP12052298.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Several typos; the manuscript needs thorough language revision

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for his/her time and advice. Attached there are our replies.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

the article can be published in present form

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Most of the suggestions were implemented. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

average

Back to TopTop