Regional Dominant Frequency: A New Tool for Wave Break Identification During Atrial Fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac mapping systems are based on the time/frequency feature analyses of intracardiac electrograms recorded from individual bipolar/unipolar electrodes. Signals from each electrode are processed independently. Such approaches fail to investigate the interrelationship between simultaneously recorded channels of any given mapping catheter during atrial fibrillation (AF). We introduce a novel signal processing technique that reflects regional dominant frequency (RDF) components. We show that RDF can be used to identify and characterize variation and disorganization in wavefront propagation - wave breaks. The intracardiac electrograms from the left atrium of 15 patients were exported to MATLAB and custom software employed to estimate RDF and wave break rate (WBR). We observed a heterogeneous distribution of both RDF and WBR; the two measures were weakly correlated (0.3; p<0.001). We identified locations of AF or atrial tachycardia (ATach) termination and later compared offline with RDF and WBR maps. We inspected our novel metrics for associations with AF termination sites. Areas associated with AF termination demonstrated high RDF and low WBR (↑RDF,↓WBR). These sites were present in 14 of 15 patients (mean 2.6±1.2 sites per patient; range, 1 to 4 sites), 43% situated within the pulmonary veins. In nine patients where AF terminated to sinus rhythm (6) or ATach (3), post hoc analysis demonstrated all ↑RDF,↓WBR sites were ablated and correlated with AF termination sites. The proposed RDF signal processing tools can be used to identify and quantify wave break, and the combined use of these two novel metrics can aid characterization of AF. Further prospective studies are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".