Feature-Based Neural Network Approach for Oscillometric Blood Pressure Estimation
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
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.
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