# US 2019/0172367 A1 · Method and system for estimating a demand or an attentional cost associated with the execution of a task or attention sharing strategies developed by an individual

> Agents: this data is available as JSON from the patentgrep API and MCP server — see https://patentgrep.com/llms.txt

- Number: US 2019/0172367 A1
- Document ID: US20190172367A1
- Status: Published application
- Kind: A1
- Application number: 16/088,005
- Filed: 2017-03-23
- Published: 2019-06-06
- Earliest claimed: 2016-03-24
- Assignees: Universite Grenoble Alpes; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire De Grenoble
- Applicants: Université Grenoble Alpes; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire De Grenoble
- Inventors: Nicolas VUILLERME; Petra HLAVACKOVA; Bruno DIOT; Antony FLEURY
- Web page: https://patentgrep.com/patent/US20190172367A1

## CPC

- G09B 19/003: {Repetitive work cycles; Sequence of movements}
- A61B 5/1126: {using a particular sensing technique}
- A61B 5/168: {Evaluating attention deficit, hyperactivity}
- G09B 7/00: Electrically-operated teaching apparatus or devices working with questions and answers (mechanically operated G09B3/00; computing arrangements G06F)
- G09B 7/02: of the type wherein the student is expected to construct an answer to the question which is presented or wherein the machine gives an answer to the question presented by a student
- G09B 19/0038: {Sports}
- G16H 50/20: for computer-aided diagnosis, e.g. based on medical expert systems
- G09B: EDUCATIONAL OR DEMONSTRATION APPLIANCES; APPLIANCES FOR TEACHING, OR COMMUNICATING WITH, THE BLIND, DEAF OR MUTE; MODELS; PLANETARIA; GLOBES; MAPS; DIAGRAMS (devices for psychotechnics or for testing reaction times A61B5/16; games, sports, amusements A63; projectors, projector screens G03B)
- A61B: DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION (usefulness limited to only animals A61D)
- G16H: HEALTHCARE INFORMATICS, i.e. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR THE HANDLING OR PROCESSING OF MEDICAL OR HEALTHCARE DATA

## Abstract

The invention relates to a method for estimating the attentional resources invoked for the execution of a primary task and/or attention sharing strategies developed by an individual, said method being implemented in a mobile terminal and being based on the utilization of the dual-task paradigm, noteworthy in that it comprises the following steps: —Evaluation (10) of first performance ratings of the individual during the execution of a primary task alone, —Evaluation (20) of second performance ratings of the individual during the execution of a secondary task alone, —Evaluation (30) of third performance ratings of the individual during the simultaneous execution of the primary and secondary tasks, —Estimation (40) of the attentional demand required for the execution of the primary task and/or of the effect (beneficial or negative) of a secondary task on the control mechanisms involved in the execution of the primary task and/or attention sharing strategies developed by an individual by comparing the first, second and third performance ratings evaluated during the previous steps.

## Claims

### Claim 1

A method for estimating an attentional demand or cost associated with the execution of a task or of an attention sharing strategy developed by an individual, the said method being implemented in a mobile terminal and being based on the use of the multi-task paradigm, characterized in that it comprises the following steps:
a) Evaluation of first performance ratings of the individual during the execution of at least one primary task, the evaluation step including the sub-steps consisting in:
Generating a first type of visual and/or audio and/or touch-sensitive information on the terminal, the said information including instructions relating to the primary task to be carried out,
Measuring a plurality of first data values during the execution of the primary task,
Determining an actual movement of the individual with processing means of the mobile terminal, the actual movement being determined based on the measured first data values during the execution of the primary task,
b) Evaluation of second performance ratings of the individual during the execution of at least one secondary task, the evaluation step including the sub-steps consisting in:
Generating a second type of visual and/or audio and/or touch-sensitive information on the terminal, the said information including instructions relating to the secondary task to be carried out,
Collecting second data values representing the response of the individual during the execution of the secondary task,
c) Evaluation of third performance ratings of the individual during the simultaneous execution of the primary task and of the secondary task, the evaluation step including the sub-steps consisting in:
Generating a third type of visual and/or audio and/or touch-sensitive information on the terminal, the said information including instructions relating to the simultaneous execution of the primary and secondary tasks,
Measuring third data values relating to the execution of the primary and secondary tasks,
d) Comparison of the first, second and third performance ratings evaluated during the steps a) to c):
for estimating the attentional demand required for the execution of the primary task and/or
for estimating the effect (beneficial or negative) of a secondary task on the control mechanisms involved in the execution of the primary task and/or
for estimating an attention sharing strategy developed by the individual.

### Claim 2 (depends on 1)

The method as claimed in claim 1, in which the secondary task consists in the execution of an action in response to at least one visual and/or audio and/or tactile stimulus, the moment of generation of each stimulus during the step c) depending on a position in the actual movement corresponding to the execution of the primary task.

### Claim 3 (depends on 1)

The method as claimed in claim 1, in which the step c) for evaluating third performance ratings comprises a sub-step consisting in:
Detecting a cycle in the actual movement based on the measured first data values, and
Generating a stimulus for the execution of the secondary task at a given moment in the cycle,
Repeating the generation of the stimulus at each corresponding moment during successive cycles.

### Claim 4 (depends on 1)

The method as claimed in claim 1, in which the step c) for evaluating third performance ratings comprises a sub-step consisting in:
Detecting various positions in the actual movement based on measured first data values,
Generating a stimulus for the execution of the secondary task at a given position,
Repeating the generation of the stimulus for various positions of the actual movement.

### Claim 5 (depends on 1)

The method as claimed in claim 1, in which the step c) for evaluating third performance ratings comprises a sub-step consisting in:
Detecting a particular event in the execution of the primary task based on measured first data values,
Generating a stimulus for the execution of the secondary task upon a given event,
Repeating the generation of the stimulus for various events of the primary task.

### Claim 6 (depends on 1)

The method as claimed in claim 1, in which the step a) for evaluating first performance ratings comprises a sub-step consisting in adjusting a level of difficulty of the primary task as a function of a score determined in association with the execution of the primary task.

### Claim 7 (depends on 1)

The method as claimed in claim 1, in which the step for evaluating second performance ratings comprises a sub-step consisting in comparing the collected second data values with a response model for determining a score associated with the execution of the secondary task.

### Claim 8 (depends on 7)

The method as claimed in claim 7, in which the step b) for evaluating second performance ratings comprises a sub-step consisting in adjusting a level of difficulty of the secondary task as a function of the score determined in association with the execution of the secondary task.

### Claim 9 (depends on 1)

The method as claimed in claim 1, in which the step a) for evaluating first performance ratings comprises a sub-step consisting in comparing each measured first data value with at least one theoretical data value, so as to obtain a plurality of differences in correspondence representative of variations over time between the actual movement of the individual and a desired movement that the individual should have made.

### Claim 10 (depends on 1)

The method as claimed in claim 1, in which the mobile terminal comprises three sensors consisting of a magnetometer, an accelerometer and a gyroscope, the sub-step for measuring a plurality of first data values consisting in measuring:
at least one linear acceleration with the accelerometer, and preferably three linear accelerations along three orthogonal axes,
at least one angular velocity with the gyroscope, and preferably three angular velocities along the three orthogonal axes,
at least one magnetic field with the magnetometer, and preferably three magnetic fields along the three orthogonal axes.

### Claim 11 (depends on 10)

The method as claimed in claim 10, in which the sub-step consisting in determining an actual movement comprises the estimation of an orientation vector of the mobile terminal based on the first data values coming from the measurements of the accelerometer, of the magnetometer and of the gyroscope.

### Claim 12 (depends on 11)

The method as claimed in claim 11, which comprises, prior to the sub-step consisting in determining an actual movement, a sub-step consisting in filtering the measured first data values using a Kalman filter so as to eliminate interference due to the measurement noise and errors.

### Claim 13 (depends on 12)

The method as claimed in claim 12, in which the sub-step consisting in filtering the first data values comprises:
the estimation of a first orientation vector based on the measurements from the accelerometer and from the magnetometer,
the estimation of a second orientation vector based on the measurements of the gyroscope,
the comparison of the estimated first and second orientation vectors and the use of their difference for updating the Kalman filter.

### Claim 14 (depends on 1)

A computer program product comprising a program code recorded on a data medium readable by a computer for executing the method as claimed in claim 1, when the computer program is applied to a computer in order to be executed.