MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012614978 · doi:10.4018/jcini.2009062305

An Unbiased Linear Adaptive Filter with Normalized Coefficients for the Removal of Noise in Electrocardiographic Signals

2009· article· en· W2012614978 on OpenAlexaff
Yunfeng Wu, Rangaraj M. Rangayyan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMean squared errorAdaptive filterLeast mean squares filterComputer scienceNoise (video)Recursive least squares filterFilter (signal processing)MathematicsAlgorithmStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors propose an unbiased linear adaptive filter (ULAF) to eliminate high-frequency random noise in electrocardiographic (ECG) signals. The ULAF does not contain a bias in its summation unit, and the filter coefficients are normalized. During the adaptation process, the normalized coefficients are updated with the steepest-descent algorithm in order to achieve efficient filtering of noisy ECG signals. The authors tested the ULAF with ECG signals recorded from 16 subjects, and compared the performance of the ULAF with that of the least-mean-square (LMS) and recursive-least-squares (RLS) adaptive filters. The filtering performance was quantified in terms of the root-mean-squared error (RMSE), normalized correlation coefficient (NCC), and filtered noise entropy (FNE). A template derived from each ECG signal was used as the reference to compute the measures of filtering performance. The results indicated that the ULAF was able to provided noise-free ECG signals with an average RMSE of 0.0287, which was lower than the second best RMSE (0.0365) obtained with the LMS filter. With respect to waveform fidelity, the proposed ULAF provided the highest average NCC (0.9964) among the three filters studied. In addition, the ULAF effectively removed more noise measured by FNE versus the LMS and RLS filters in most of the ECG signals tested.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural IntelligenceSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207