Fast T Wave Detection Calibrated by Clinical Knowledge with Annotation of P and T Waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are limited studies on the automatic detection of T waves in arrhythmic electrocardiogram (ECG) signals. This is perhaps because there is no available arrhythmia dataset with annotated T waves. There is a growing need to develop numerically-efficient algorithms that can accommodate the new trend of battery-driven ECG devices. Moreover, there is also a need to analyze long-term recorded signals in a reliable and time-efficient manner, therefore improving the diagnostic ability of mobile devices and point-of-care technologies. METHODS: Here, the T wave annotation of the well-known MIT-BIH arrhythmia database is discussed and provided. Moreover, a simple fast method for detecting T waves is introduced. A typical T wave detection method has been reduced to a basic approach consisting of two moving averages and dynamic thresholds. The dynamic thresholds were calibrated using four clinically known types of sinus node response to atrial premature depolarization (compensation, reset, interpolation, and reentry). RESULTS: The determination of T wave peaks is performed and the proposed algorithm is evaluated on two well-known databases, the QT and MIT-BIH Arrhythmia databases. The detector obtained a sensitivity of 97.14% and a positive predictivity of 99.29% over the first lead of the validation databases (total of 221,186 beats). CONCLUSIONS: We present a simple yet very reliable T wave detection algorithm that can be potentially implemented on mobile battery-driven devices. In contrast to complex methods, it can be easily implemented in a digital filter design.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".