Feasibility of long-distance heart rate monitoring using transmittance photoplethysmographic imaging (PPGI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Photoplethysmography (PPG) devices are widely used for monitoring cardiovascular function. However, these devices require skin contact, which restricts their use to at-rest short-term monitoring. Photoplethysmographic imaging (PPGI) has been recently proposed as a non-contact monitoring alternative by measuring blood pulse signals across a spatial region of interest. Existing systems operate in reflectance mode, many of which are limited to short-distance monitoring and are prone to temporal changes in ambient illumination. This paper is the first study to investigate the feasibility of long-distance non-contact cardiovascular monitoring at the supermeter level using transmittance PPGI. For this purpose, a novel PPGI system was designed at the hardware and software level. Temporally coded illumination (TCI) is proposed for ambient correction, and a signal processing pipeline is proposed for PPGI signal extraction. Experimental results show that the processing steps yielded a substantially more pulsatile PPGI signal than the raw acquired signal, resulting in statistically significant increases in correlation to ground-truth PPG in both short- and long-distance monitoring. The results support the hypothesis that long-distance heart rate monitoring is feasible using transmittance PPGI, allowing for new possibilities of monitoring cardiovascular function in a non-contact manner.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".