MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161531776 · doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00064.2009

Validation of a simple model for the morphology of the T wave in unipolar electrograms

2009· article· en· W2161531776 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Potse, Alain Vinet, Tobias Opthof, Ruben Coronel

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepolarizationSimple (philosophy)Action (physics)PhysicsPosition (finance)Statistical physicsVentricular RepolarizationNeuroscienceBiologyQuantum mechanicsElectrophysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Local unipolar electrograms (UEGs) permit assessment of local activation and repolarization times at multiple sites simultaneously. However, UEG-based indexes of local repolarization are still debated, in particular for positive T waves. Previous experimental and computer modeling studies have not been able to terminate the debate. In this study we validate a simple theoretical model of the UEG and use it to explain how repolarization statistics in the UEG relate to those in the action potential. The model reconstructs the UEG by taking the difference between an inverted local action potential and a position-independent remote signal. In normal tissue, this extremely simple model predicts T-wave morphology with surprising accuracy while explaining in a readily understandable way why the instant of repolarization is always related to the steepest upstroke of the UEG, both in positive and negative T waves, and why positive T waves are related to early repolarizing sites, whereas negative T waves are related to late repolarizing sites.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations100
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory PhysiologySame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207