Wavelet transform cardiorespiratory coherence detects patient movement during general anesthesia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart rate variability (HRV) may provide anesthesiologists with a noninvasive tool for monitoring nociception during general anesthesia. A novel wavelet transform cardiorespiratory coherence (WTCRC) algorithm has been developed to calculate estimates of the linear coupling between heart rate and respiration. WTCRC values range from 1 (high coherence, no nociception) to 0 (low coherence, strong nociception). We have assessed the algorithm's ability to detect movement events (indicative of patient response to nociception) in 39 pediatric patients receiving general anesthesia. Sixty movement events were recorded during the 39 surgical procedures. Minimum and average WTCRC were calculated in a 30 second window surrounding each movement event. We used a 95% significance level as the threshold for detecting nociception during patient movement. The 95% significance level was calculated relative to a red noise background, using Monte Carlo simulations. It was calculated to be 0.7. Values below this threshold were treated as successful detection. The algorithm was found to detect movement with sensitivity ranging from 95% (minimum WTCRC) to 65% (average WTCRC). The WTCRC algorithm thus shows promise for noninvasively monitoring nociception during general anesthesia, using only heart rate and respiration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it