MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949605588 · doi:10.82308/34165

Automated off-line cardiorespiratory event detection and validation

2006· article· en· W2949605588 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ahmed Aoude

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCardiorespiratory fitnessArtifact (error)Asynchrony (computer programming)ApneaComputer scienceSleep apneaEvent (particle physics)HeartbeatBreathingVisual inspectionArtificial intelligenceMedicinePhysical therapyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sleep apnea is a condition where breathing unexpectedly stops during sleep. This condition is a common medical problem affecting infants that can result in serious complications if left untreated. Anesthesia can increase episodes of post-operative sleep apnea in infants. Therefore, the monitoring of infants after surgery is of utmost importance. The standard for diagnosing apnea events remains the visual scoring of cardiorespiratory data by trained personnel. This process is time consuming and prone to human error. In this thesis, we present automated off-line algorithms for the detection of pauses, asynchrony and movement artifact in cardiorespiratory data. These algorithms were implemented in a new tool intended to replace the visual scoring process. The automated algorithms' effectiveness relative to visual scoring is presented. This comparison was achieved using a new visual scoring tool. Results presented in this thesis demonstrate that the developed methods are comparable to visual scoring, work with uncalibrated respiratory signals and provide quick, reliable and standardized analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207