MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127628656

Volumetric imaging of cardiac current sources using Lp-norm regularization

2013· article· en· W2127628656 on OpenAlexaff
Azar Rahimi, Jingjia Xu, John R. Fitz‐Clarke, Linwei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueComputing in Cardiology Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)Current (fluid)Norm (philosophy)Computer scienceCurrent sourceIterative reconstructionAlgorithmMathematical optimizationMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computational cardiac current source imaging aim to mathematically reconstruct current source activities from noninvasive voltage data sensed on the body-surface. However, the progress in this field is hindered by the ill-posedness and the lack of a unique solution of the reconstruction problem. Common L2 and L1-norm regularization tend to produce a solution that is either too diffused or too scattered to reflect the complex spatial structure of current source distribution in the heart. In this work, we propose a general regularization with Lp-norm (1 <; p <; 2) constraint to bridge the gap and balance between an overly-smeared and overly-focal solution in cardiac source reconstruction. In a set of phantom experiments, we demonstrate the superiority of the proposed Lp-norm method over its L1 and L2 counterparts in imaging cardiac current sources with increasing extents. Through computer-simulated as well as real-data experiments, we further demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed method in imaging the complex structure of current sources activity along the infarct border. This ability to preserve the spatial structure of source distribution is important for revealing the potential disruption to the normal current flow in the heart.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
GenreMethods

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 topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207