MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159581641 · doi:10.1109/tim.2010.2092874

Extraction of Breathing Signal and Suppression of Its Effects in Oscillometric Blood Pressure Measurement

2011· article· en· W2159581641 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreathingSIGNAL (programming language)WaveformBlood pressureBiomedical engineeringMedicineComputer scienceAnesthesiaInternal medicineTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breathing causes fluctuations in blood pressure and contributes to variations in blood pressure estimates. In order to reduce the variability in the blood pressure estimates induced by breathing, either the breathing signal should be removed from the oscillometric blood pressure signal, or its effects should be suppressed. This paper presents a hybrid method that combines homomorphic and adaptive signal processing techniques to extract the breathing signal from the oscillometric signal with or without a simultaneously recorded electrocardiogram (ECG). The quality of the extracted breathing signal and the depth of breathing are assessed using the reference breathing signals. The breathing signals extracted using the accompanying ECG signal were found to be superior in quality compared to the ones extracted from the oscillometric waveform. The blood pressure estimates were evaluated before and after the breathing suppression techniques were implemented. As a result of the breathing suppression, the fluctuation of the systolic and diastolic blood pressure estimates obtained from a database of 85 healthy subjects is reduced.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.193 · 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