Block sparse multi‐lead ECG compression exploiting between‐lead collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi‐lead ECG compression (M‐lEC) has attracted tremendous attention in long‐term monitoring of the patient's heart behaviour. This study proposes a method denoted by block sparse M‐lEC (BlS M‐lEC) in order to exploit between‐lead correlations to compress the signals in a more efficient way. This is due to the fact that multi‐lead electrocardiography signals are multiple observations of the same source (heart) from different locations. Consequently, they have a high correlation in terms of the support set of their sparse models which leads them to share dominant common structure. In order to obtain the block sparse model, the collaborative version of lasso estimator is applied. In addition, it is shown that raised cosine kernel has advantages over conventional Gaussian and wavelet (Daubechies family) due to its specific properties. It is demonstrated that using raised cosine kernel in constructing the sparsifying basis matrix gives a sparser model which results in higher compression ratio and lower reconstruction error. The simulation results show the average improvement of 37, 88 and 90–97% for BlS M‐lEC compared to the non‐collaborative case with raised cosine kernel, Gaussian kernel and collaborative case with Daubechies wavelet kernels, respectively, in terms of reconstruction error while the compression ratio is considered fixed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".