MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137760628 · doi:10.1109/memea.2011.5966751

Measuring heart rate, breathing rate and skin conductance during exercise

2011· article· en· W2137760628 on OpenAlexaff
Jelena Nikolic-Popovic, Rafik Goubran

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramWearable computerBreathingSkin conductanceComputer scienceHeart rateRespiratory rateAccelerometerContinuous monitoringWearable technologyRemote patient monitoringReal-time computingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineBiomedical engineeringWirelessEmbedded systemEngineeringTelecommunicationsBlood pressureInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sensor miniaturization and advances in low power communication protocols have helped enable continuous monitoring of physiological signals. Commercial products exist today which are wearable, in a form of a chest belt or a wrist strap, and can continuously stream or log bio-signals such as heart rate, as well as motion signals. Such devices could be of importance not only to a health-conscious consumer, but also in the healthcare system, for monitoring of patients whose prescribed treatment includes some form of physical activity. This paper proposes a new framework for monitoring compliance and impact of an exercise regimen. While previous related work typically uses an accelerometer based approach, our method gives a more complete picture of impact of exercise on the subject by adding bio-signals such as heart rate, breathing rate and skin conductivity and correlating them with motion signals. Such framework can be used to assess progress over time for different types of exercise regimens.

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)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207