## 4 Discussion
The brain compensated by shifting more attention to the central region to maintain task performance. Previous research has shown that the central region is associated with perceiving task-relevant information and processing automatic responses [44]. Therefore, under fatigued conditions, individuals may rely more on automation to handle tasks and meet lower-level task demands. Fatigue and trial type also showed a significant interaction effect for P300 latency. Under non-fatigued conditions, P300 latency decreased slightly post-interruption, but this phenomenon was absent under fatigue. P300 latency reflects attentional focus during the information processing stage, and is functionally used to evaluate attention and memory capabilities [45]. Consistently with previous research, under fatigued conditions, decreased P300 amplitude post-interruption indicates impaired executive control, slower decision-making adjustments, and increased risk of critical failures. Further studies have found that the differing changes in P300 amplitude between the frontal and central regions reveal the complex effects of task interruptions on response inhibition under fatigue. Decreased P300 amplitude in the frontal region reflects weakened inhibition function, while increased P300 amplitude in the central region represents a compensatory control mechanism, where the brain reallocates attention to maintain task execution. However, this compensation does not always effectively counteract the negative effects of fatigue. Changes in cognitive resource allocation strategies under fatigue may impair efficiency and precision, increasing the likelihood of unsafe behaviors. Mechanisms of Unsafe Behaviors Under Fatigue: the limitations of the compensation mechanism. Task interruptions under fatigue increase the risk of unsafe behaviors by impairing the functioning of the executive control system and disrupting the coordination of cognitive resources. As analyzed earlier, after a task interruption, individuals must exert greater cognitive effort to resume task execution. This involves the facilitation system supporting task switching, and the inhibition system reducing interference from irrelevant information and errors. In non-fatigued states, increases in P200 and P300 amplitudes provide evidence for these mechanisms. From the observed increase in P200 latency and RTs, it is apparent that the compensatory control mechanisms made efforts to mitigate the negative effects of task interruptions through strategies such as increased cognitive effort and adjustments in execution strategies, partially offsetting the adverse impacts. However, fatigue exacerbates the cognitive load required for task switching, demanding more cognitive resources to re-engage in the task--resources that are nearly depleted in the fatigued state. The difficulty in reallocating cognitive resources after task interruptions directly impacts the timeliness and ACC of decision-making, as evidenced by significant changes in RTs and ACC under fatigue. Changes in neural components reflect the detrimental effects of fatigue on the executive control system. The increase in P200 amplitude and prolongation of its latency indicate a slower response to task switching, while the reduction in the frontal region P300 amplitude and the extension of its latency further reveal weakened executive control. This is particularly pronounced during complex task interruptions, where overactivation of the inhibition system impairs its ability to effectively suppress irrelevant information and distractions, further affecting individuals' judgment and response efficiency during tasks. Meanwhile, the increased P300 amplitude in the central region suggests that the brain attempts to compensate for this imbalance. However, this compensatory control mechanism fails to adequately counteract the lack of cognitive resources, leading to reduced efficiency in information processing and task execution. Consequently, this inefficiency increases the likelihood of unsafe behaviors.