Atrial Evoked Response Integral for Automatic Capture Verification in Atrial Pacing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beat-by-beat Autocapture is currently limited to operation in the ventricle with bipolar leads. The authors investigated the integral of the negative-going portion of the atrial evoked response integral (AERI) as a potential resource for verification of atrial capture. Intracardiac electrogram signals were collected from 59 patients (ages 67.8 +/- 15.1 years) with bipolar, low polarization atrial leads. The signals were collected over a mean period of 6.1 months (minimum 4 days) after lead implantation. St. Jude Medical Affinity pulse generators were used to perform automatic capture threshold tests while the electrogram signals were recorded by a Model 3510 programming device. These signals were transferred to a personal computer in digital form for later analysis. The AERI was calculated at each programmable pacing voltage until capture was lost. The difference between the polarization integral at loss of capture and evoked response integral with successful capture was sufficient to justify enabling the atrial Autocapture feature in 53 of 59 patients in whom bipolar pacing and unipolar sensing was performed. The authors developed a calibration routine to identify automatically those patients in whom atrial Autocapture could be programmed On, based on the polarization integral at loss of capture, the estimated maximum polarization integral, and the AERI. Preliminary analysis indicated that the AERI is a practical resource for beat-by-beat atrial capture detection when used with low polarization leads.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".