MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1694175521 · doi:10.3390/s150717693

Fast T Wave Detection Calibrated by Clinical Knowledge with Annotation of P and T Waves

2015· article· en· W1694175521 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCharles Darwin UniversityAustralian Government
KeywordsComputer scienceCompensation (psychology)Node (physics)Filter (signal processing)DetectorReset (finance)Sensitivity (control systems)AnnotationP waveArtificial intelligenceReal-time computingElectronic engineeringComputer visionEngineeringAcousticsPhysicsTelecommunicationsAtrial fibrillationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it