Swallow segmentation with artificial neural networks and multi-sensor fusion
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
Swallow segmentation is a critical precursory step to the analysis of swallowing signal characteristics. In an effort to automatically segment swallows, we investigated artificial neural networks (ANN) with information from cervical dual-axis accelerometry, submental MMG, and nasal airflow. Our objectives were (1) to investigate the relationship between segmentation performance and the number of signal sources and (2) to identify the signals or signal combinations most useful for swallow segmentation. Signals were acquired from 17 healthy adults in both discrete and continuous swallowing tasks using five stimuli. Training and test feature vectors were constructed with variances from single or multiple signals, estimated within 200 ms moving windows with 50% overlap. Corresponding binary target labels (swallow or non-swallow) were derived by manual segmentation. A separate 3-layer ANN was trained for each participant-signal combination, and all possible signal combinations were investigated. As more signal sources were included, segmentation performance improved in terms of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and adjusted accuracy. The combination of all four signal sources achieved the highest mean accuracy and adjusted accuracy of 88.5% and 89.6%, respectively. A-P accelerometry proved to be the most discriminatory source, while the inclusion of MMG or nasal airflow resulted in the least performance improvement. These findings suggest that an ANN, multi-sensor fusion approach to segmentation is worthy of further investigation in swallowing studies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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