MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093451445 · doi:10.1109/btas.2010.5634493

HeartID: Cardiac biometric recognition

2010· article· en· W2093451445 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsDiscriminative modelComputer scienceFeature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceWaveletDependency (UML)PopulationSpeech recognitionNoise (video)ModalFeature (linguistics)MedicineImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter examines the applicability of cardiac signals for biometric recognition. Two physiological signals are considered, namely the Electrocardiogram (ECG) and the Phono-cardiogram (PCG) as it has been shown they bare adequate discriminative information in a population. Due to the idiosyncratic properties of ECG and PCG, individual algorithms are developed for feature extraction. Time dependency, a major challenge of cardiac biometrics, is taken to consideration in the design of robust gallery templates. To that end, a wavelet based analysis is introduced to handle noise artifacts and heart rate variability. A bi-modal configuration is presented, to perform decision level fusion of the information. The recognition performance, tested over 21 subjects, is very promising.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207