MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121071670 · doi:10.1109/tim.2011.2123210

Feature-Based Neural Network Approach for Oscillometric Blood Pressure Estimation

2011· article· en· W2121071670 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamad Forouzanfar, Hilmi R. Dajani, V.Z. Groza, Miodrag Bolić, Sreeraman Rajan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackpropagationArtificial neural networkWaveformComputer scienceLevenberg–Marquardt algorithmFeature (linguistics)Mean squared errorArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmApproximation errorMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a novel feature-based neural network (NN) approach for estimation of blood pressure (BP) from wrist oscillometric measurements. Unlike previous methods that use the raw oscillometric waveform envelope (OMWE) as input to the NN, in this paper, we propose to use features extracted from the envelope. The OMWE is mathematically modeled as a sum of two Gaussian functions. The optimum parameters of this model are found by minimizing the least squares error between the model and the OMWE using the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm and are used as features. Two separate feed-forward NNs (FFNNs) are then designed to estimate the systolic and diastolic BPs using these features. The FFNNs are trained using the resilient backpropagation learning algorithm and tested on a data set of BP measurements recorded from 85 subjects. The performance is then compared with that of the conventional maximum amplitude algorithm, adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system, and already published NN-based methods. It is found that the proposed approach achieves lower values of mean absolute error and standard deviation of error in the estimation of BP. In addition, the proposed approach has the following advantages: lower complexity with respect to the design parameters, smaller training data set, and lower computational load.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations79
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and MeasurementSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207