Quantitative feature analysis of continuous analytic wavelet transforms of electrocardiography and electromyography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theoretical and practical advances in time-frequency analysis, in general, and the continuous wavelet transform (CWT), in particular, have increased over the last two decades. Although the Morlet wavelet has been the default choice for wavelet analysis, a new family of analytic wavelets, known as generalized Morse wavelets, which subsume several other analytic wavelet families, have been increasingly employed due to their time and frequency localization benefits and their utility in isolating and extracting quantifiable features in the time-frequency domain. The current paper describes two practical applications of analysing the features obtained from the generalized Morse CWT: (i) electromyography, for isolating important features in muscle bursts during skating, and (ii) electrocardiography, for assessing heart rate variability, which is represented as the ridge of the main transform frequency band. These features are subsequently quantified to facilitate exploration of the underlying physiological processes from which the signals were generated.This article is part of the theme issue 'Redundancy rules: the continuous wavelet transform comes of age'.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".