MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113589597 · doi:10.1109/iembs.1997.756618

Automatic detection of cardiac cycle based on an adaptive time-frequency analysis of the phonocardiogram

2002· article· en· W2113589597 on OpenAlexaff
H.P. Sava, Louis‐Gilles Durand

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhonocardiogramComputer scienceCardiac cycleTime–frequency analysisSIGNAL (programming language)Matching (statistics)Energy (signal processing)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionComputer visionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Demonstrates the feasibility of an adaptive time-frequency analysis, the matching pursuit method, to detect each cardiac cycle of the phonocardiogram (PCG). The proposed new method combines a global search of the PCG in terms of energy distribution of the most important components with a local search according to the specific events found within a cardiac cycle. In the PCG recordings of twenty five patients, a detection rate of 96% was achieved. By eliminating the need for the recording of the electrocardiogram as the time-reference signal, this method reduces hardware and software overheads when analysis of PCG signals is primarily aimed. It is believed that, with minor modifications, this method can also be applied to extract different events of the PCG within a cardiac cycle. Furthermore, the procedure described in this paper can be applied to other kind of biomedical signals in order to extract coherent structures and identify specific events.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations7
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207