MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025265708 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0086427

Estimating Respiratory and Heart Rates from the Correntropy Spectral Density of the Photoplethysmogram

2014· article· en· W2025265708 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

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Children's Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramPulse oximetryRespiratory rateHeart ratePulse (music)Biomedical engineeringMathematicsMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicineAnesthesiaBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The photoplethysmogram (PPG) obtained from pulse oximetry measures local variations of blood volume in tissues, reflecting the peripheral pulse modulated by heart activity, respiration and other physiological effects. We propose an algorithm based on the correntropy spectral density (CSD) as a novel way to estimate respiratory rate (RR) and heart rate (HR) from the PPG. Time-varying CSD, a technique particularly well-suited for modulated signal patterns, is applied to the PPG. The respiratory and cardiac frequency peaks detected at extended respiratory (8 to 60 breaths/min) and cardiac (30 to 180 beats/min) frequency bands provide RR and HR estimations. The CSD-based algorithm was tested against the Capnobase benchmark dataset, a dataset from 42 subjects containing PPG and capnometric signals and expert labeled reference RR and HR. The RR and HR estimation accuracy was assessed using the unnormalized root mean square (RMS) error. We investigated two window sizes (60 and 120 s) on the Capnobase calibration dataset to explore the time resolution of the CSD-based algorithm. A longer window decreases the RR error, for 120-s windows, the median RMS error (quartiles) obtained for RR was 0.95 (0.27, 6.20) breaths/min and for HR was 0.76 (0.34, 1.45) beats/min. Our experiments show that in addition to a high degree of accuracy and robustness, the CSD facilitates simultaneous and efficient estimation of RR and HR. Providing RR every minute, expands the functionality of pulse oximeters and provides additional diagnostic power to this non-invasive monitoring tool.

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)0.000
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.186 · 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