High-resolution motion-compensated imaging photoplethysmography for remote heart rate monitoring
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
We present a novel non-contact photoplethysmographic (PPG) imaging system based on high-resolution video recordings of ambient reflectance of human bodies that compensates for body motion and takes advantage of skin erythema fluctuations to improve measurement reliability for the purpose of remote heart rate monitoring. A single measurement location for recording the ambient reflectance is automatically identified on an individual, and the motion for the location is determined over time via measurement location tracking. Based on the determined motion information motion-compensated reflectance measurements at different wavelengths for the measurement location can be acquired, thus providing more reliable measurements for the same location on the human over time. The reflectance measurement is used to determine skin erythema fluctuations over time, resulting in the capture of a PPG signal with a high signal-to-noise ratio. To test the efficacy of the proposed system, a set of experiments involving human motion in a front-facing position were performed under natural ambient light. The experimental results demonstrated that skin erythema fluctuations can achieve noticeably improved average accuracy in heart rate measurement when compared to previously proposed non-contact PPG imaging systems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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