MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108660397 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2005.869789

A Robust Method for Heart Sounds Localization Using Lung Sounds Entropy

2006· article· en· W2108660397 on OpenAlexaff
Azadeh Yadollahi, Z.M.K. Moussavi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntropy (arrow of time)Heart soundsWaveletSpeech recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceBioacousticsWavelet transformApproximate entropyArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPhysicsTelecommunicationsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart sounds are the main unavoidable interference in lung sound recording and analysis. Hence, several techniques have been developed to reduce or cancel heart sounds (HS) from lung sound records. The first step in most HS cancellation techniques is to detect the segments including HS. This paper proposes a novel method for HS localization using entropy of the lung sounds. We investigated both Shannon and Renyi entropies and the results of the method using Shannon entropy were superior. Another HS localization method based on multiresolution product of lung sounds wavelet coefficients adopted from was also implemented for comparison. The methods were tested on data from 6 healthy subjects recorded at low (7.5 ml/s/kg) and medium 115 ml/s/kg) flow rates. The error of entropy-based method using Shannon entropy was found to be 0.1 +/- 0.4% and 1.0 +/- 0.7% at low and medium flow rates, respectively, which is significantly lower than that of multiresolution product method and those of other methods reported in previous studies. The proposed method is fully automated and detects HS included segments in a completely unsupervised manner.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations75
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207