MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990956587 · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2014.2360156

Automatic Annotation of Seismocardiogram With High-Frequency Precordial Accelerations

2014· article· en· W1990956587 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsComputer scienceEnvelope (radar)Computer-supported cooperative workAccelerometerPrecordial examinationWaveformHilbert transformAnnotationSIGNAL (programming language)AlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceElectrocardiographySpeech recognitionComputer visionWork (physics)PhysicsRadarMedicineTelecommunicationsCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seismocardiogram (SCG) is the low-frequency vibrations signal recorded from the chest using accelerometers. Peaks on dorsoventral and sternal SCG correspond to specific cardiac events. Prior research work has shown the potential of extracting such peaks for various types of monitoring and diagnosis applications. However, annotation of these peaks is not a trivial task and complicated in some subjects. In this paper, an automated method is proposed to annotate these peaks. The high-frequency accelerations obtained from the same accelerometer, used to record SCG with, were used to facilitate the annotation of the SCG. Algorithms were developed for detection of isovolumic moment (IM) and aortic valve closure (AC) points of SCG. Four different envelope calculation methods were used: cardiac sound characteristic waveform (CSCW), Shannon, absolute, and Hilbert. The algorithms were evaluated based on a dataset including 18 subjects undergoing lower body negative pressure and were further tested with another dataset, which included 67 subjects. These datasets had been previously manually annotated. The algorithm based on CSCW envelope calculation produced the highest detection accuracy for both IM and AC. The overall CSCW algorithm detection accuracy for the test dataset was 98.7% and 99.1% for the IM and AC points, respectively.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.281 · 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