MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020021913 · doi:10.1109/embc.2012.6347449

Characterization of fractionated electrograms using a novel time-frequency based algorithm

2012· article· en· W2020021913 on OpenAlexaff
Behnaz Ghoraani, Sridhar Krishnan, Vijay S. Chauhan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatheter ablationAtrial fibrillationRf ablationAblationCardiologyAlgorithmInternal medicineComputer scienceRadiofrequency catheter ablationRadiofrequency ablationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial fibrillation (AF) arises from complex spatiotemporal atrial activation. Current treatment for patients with AF when antiarrhythmic drugs have failed is catheter ablation which uses Radiofrequency (RF) energy to destroy heart tissues that drive AF. Therefore, AF can be terminated once the AF source is localized and eliminated by RF ablation. There is considerable interest in defining whether complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE) indicate AF-perpetuation sites. This work proposes a novel time-frequency (TF) based algorithm to characterize CFAE electrograms (EGMs). The proposed technique obtains an automated classifier that is trained based on the differences evidenced between the TF structures of CFAE and non-CFAE EGMs. These characteristics are quantified using 5 TF features which are extracted using a TF matrix decomposition method performed on the EGM. The results from 5 patients with AF show that the proposed method is successful in identifying CFAE vs. non-CFAE EGMs, and might open new perspectives for a novel and reliable mapping technique to accurately characterize and understand AF mechanism.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207