MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295064164 · doi:10.1109/embc.2015.7319566

Discriminative sparse coding of ECG during ventricular arrhythmias using LC-K-SVD approach

2015· article· en· W2295064164 on OpenAlexaff
I. Kalaji, K. Balasundaram, Karthikeyan Umapathy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVentricular fibrillationVentricular tachycardiaDiscriminative modelPattern recognition (psychology)CardiologyInternal medicineArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) are two major types of ventricular arrhythmias that results due to abnormalities in the electrical activation in the ventricles of the heart. VF is the lethal of the two arrhythmias, which may lead to sudden cardiac death. The treatment options for the two arrhythmias are different. Therefore, detection and characterization of the two arrhythmias is critical to choose appropriate therapy options. Due to the time-varying nature of the signal content during cardiac arrhythmias, modeling and extracting information from them using time and frequency localized functions would be ideal. To this effect, in this work, we perform discriminative sparse coding of the ECG during ventricular arrhythmia with hybrid time-frequency dictionaries using the recently introduced Label consistent K-SVD (LC-K-SVD) approach. Using 944 segments of ventricular arrhythmias extracted from 23 patients in the Malignant Ventricular Ectopy and Creighton University Tachy-Arrhythmia databases, an overall classification accuracy of 71.55% was attained with a hybrid dictionary of Gabor and symlet4 atoms. In comparison, for the same database and non-trained dictionary (i.e the original dictionary) the classification accuracy was found to be 62.71%. In addition, the modeling error using the trained dictionary from LC-K-SVD approach was found to be significantly lower to the one using the non-trained dictionary.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207