MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967051820 · doi:10.3390/s19163472

Real-Time Cardiac Beat Detection and Heart Rate Monitoring from Combined Seismocardiography and Gyrocardiography

2019· article· en· W2967051820 on OpenAlexafffund
Yannick D’Mello, James Skoric, Shicheng Xu, Philip J. R. Roche, Michel Lortie, Stéphane Gagnon, David V. Plant

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)McGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSupine positionBeat (acoustics)Artifact (error)Cardiac cycleHeart rateComputer scienceElectrocardiographyReal-time computingHeart beatSimulationMedicineBiomedical engineeringCardiologyArtificial intelligenceInternal medicineAcousticsBlood pressurePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiography is an indispensable element of health care. However, the accessibility of at-home cardiac monitoring is limited by device complexity, accuracy, and cost. We have developed a real-time algorithm for heart rate monitoring and beat detection implemented in a custom-built, affordable system. These measurements were processed from seismocardiography (SCG) and gyrocardiography (GCG) signals recorded at the sternum, with concurrent electrocardiography (ECG) used as a reference. Our system demonstrated the feasibility of non-invasive electro-mechanical cardiac monitoring on supine, stationary subjects at a cost of $100, and with the SCG–GCG and ECG algorithms decoupled as standalone measurements. Testing was performed on 25 subjects in the supine position when relaxed, and when recovering from physical exercise, to record 23,984 cardiac cycles at heart rates in the range of 36–140 bpm. The correlation between the two measurements had r2 coefficients of 0.9783 and 0.9982 for normal (averaged) and instantaneous (beat identification) heart rates, respectively. At a sampling frequency of 250 Hz, the average computational time required was 0.088 s per measurement cycle, indicating the maximum refresh rate. A combined SCG and GCG measurement was found to improve accuracy due to fundamentally different noise rejection criteria in the mutually orthogonal signals. The speed, accuracy, and simplicity of our system validated its potential as a real-time, non-invasive, and affordable solution for outpatient cardiac monitoring in situations with negligible motion artifact.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations79
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207