An algorithm for imaging isochrones of ventricular activation on patient-specific epicardial surface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrocardiographic imaging has been shown to provide useful information for pre-procedure planning of catheter-ablation procedures.The methodology involves reconstruction of unipolar electrograms (EGMs) and isochronal maps on the epicardial surface from noninvasively acquired body-surface potentials.We have developed an algorithm for evaluating global myocardial activation times.First, the cross-correlation method determines the delay in local activation times among pairs of neighboring nodes.Next, a sparse linear system is constructed from known activation delays of neighboring nodes.To solve this system, we use a sparse Bayesian learning method to calculate the global myocardial activation times.The aim of this study was to assess the proposed method in both structurally normal and scarred ventricular myocardium.Isochronal maps of calculated activation times were compared with local activation times (LATs) derived from directly-measured epicardial EGMs obtained by electroanatomic contact mapping, for pacing delivered by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) at the endocardial right-ventricular (RV) apex, and for catheter pacing at RV epicardial site.We found that even in the presence of infarct scar, isochronal maps calculated by the proposed method correlated closely with known LATs exported from an electroanatomic mapping system.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".