MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792851582 · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2807700

An Automatic Cardiac Arrhythmia Classification System With Wearable Electrocardiogram

2018· article· en· W2792851582 on OpenAlexaff
Yufa Xia, Huailing Zhang, Lin Xu, Zhifan Gao, Heye Zhang, Huafeng Liu, Shuo Li

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersScience and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong ProvinceNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaSouth Dakota Agricultural Experiment StationChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSoftmax functionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningWearable computerAutoencoderCardiac arrhythmiaFeature extractionMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkData miningCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an automatic wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) classification and monitoring system with stacked denoising autoencoder (SDAE). We use a wearable device with wireless sensors to obtain the ECG data, and send these ECG data to a computer with Bluetooth 4.2. Then, these ECG data are classified by the automatic cardiac arrhythmia classification system. First, the ECG feature representation is learned by the SDAE with sparsity constraint. Then, the softmax regression is used to classify the ECG beats. In the fine-tuning phase, an active learning is added to improve the performance. In the active learning phase, we use the method that relies on the deep neural networks posterior probabilities to associate confidence measures to select the most informative samples. Breaking-ties and modified breaking-ties methods are used to select the most informative samples. We validate the proposed method on the well-known MIT-BIH arrhythmia database and ECG data obtained from the wearable device. We follow the recommendations of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation for class labeling and results presentation. The results show that the classification performance of our proposed approach outperforms the most of the state-of-the-art methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations124
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207