MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automatic breath and snore sounds classification from tracheal and ambient sounds recordings

2010· article· en· W2088057729 on OpenAlexaff
Azadeh Yadollahi, Zahra Moussavi

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Engineering & Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaResearch Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSound (geography)FormantSpeech recognitionMicrophoneComputer scienceAuscultationLinear discriminant analysisBioacousticsAcousticsPolysomnographyPattern recognition (psychology)Obstructive sleep apneaApneaArtificial intelligenceSound pressureMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study respiratory sound signals were recorded from 23 patients suspect of obstructive sleep apnea, who were referred for the full-night sleep lab study. The sounds were recorded with two microphones simultaneously: one placed over trachea and one hung in the air in the vicinity of the patient. During recording the sound signals, patients' Polysomnography (PSG) data were also recorded simultaneously. An automatic method was developed to classify breath and snore sound segments based on their energy, zero crossing rate and formants of the sound signals. For every sound segment, the number of zero crossings, logarithm of the signal's energy and the first formant were calculated. Fischer Linear Discriminant was implemented to transform the 3-dimensional (3D) feature set to a 1-dimensional (1D) space and the Bayesian threshold was applied on the transformed features to classify the sound segments into either snore or breath classes. Three sets of experiments were implemented to investigate the method's performance for different training and test data sets extracted from different neck positions. The overall accuracy of all experiments for tracheal recordings were found to be more than 90% in classifying breath and snore sounds segments regardless of the neck position. This implies the method's accuracy is insensitive to patient's position; hence, simplifying data analysis for an entire night recording. The classification was also performed on sounds signals recorded simultaneously with an ambient microphone and the results were compared with those of the tracheal recording.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations57
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Engineering & PhysicsSame topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207