Ultrasound Sensors for Diaphragm Motion Tracking: An Application in Non-Invasive Respiratory Monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces a novel respiratory detection system based on diaphragm wall motion tracking using an embedded ultrasound sensory system. We assess the utility and accuracy of this method in evaluating the function of the diaphragm and its contribution to respiratory workload. The developed system is able to monitor the diaphragm wall activity when the sensor is placed in the zone of apposition (ZOA). This system allows for direct measurements with only one ultrasound PZT5 piezo transducer. The system generates pulsed ultrasound waves at 2.2 MHz and amplifies reflected echoes. An added benefit of this system is that due to its design, the respiratory signal is less subject to motion artefacts. Promising results were obtained from six subjects performing six tests per subject with an average respiration detection sensitivity and specificity of 84% and 93%, respectively. Measurements were compared to a gold standard commercial spirometer. In this study, we also compared our measurements to other conventional methods such as inertial and photoplethysmography (PPG) sensors.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".