MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116303141

Non-invasive epicardial imaging of human ventricular fibrillation

2013· article· en· W2116303141 on OpenAlexaff
John R. Fitz‐Clarke, John L. Sapp, B. Milan Horáček

Bibliographic record

VenueComputing in Cardiology Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTorsoTikhonov regularizationInverse problemBody surfaceFibrillationVentricular fibrillationMathematicsCardiologyMathematical analysisMedicineAtrial fibrillationGeometryAnatomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spatial distribution of ECG torso potentials during ventricular fibrillation (VF) might provide useful information about underlying electrical dynamics. We used an inverse solution technique to non-invasively construct images of epicardial activity of human VF. A 120-lead mapping system was used to record body surface potential maps (BSPM) from eight anesthetized patients during VF induction following implantable defibrillator placement. Epicardial potential maps of VF were derived mathematically by inverse solution using Tikhonov regularization and L-curve method, assuming a homogenous bounded torso. To assess accuracy, VF was simulated in a large-scale numerical anisotropic heart model incorporating ionic currents. Potential fields were simulated within the torso volume conductor and on the body surface by forward solution to assess the degree of spatial information attenuation. Calculated inverse solution was compared with epicardial activity on the heart model. Spatial features of VF attenuate with distance from the heart due to the volume conductor; however, the model results demonstrate that inverse solution can resolve epicardial VF patterns to a limited, but potentially useful, degree with larger spatial scales being preserved.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputing in Cardiology ConferenceSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207