MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994045961 · doi:10.1109/cse/euc.2019.00078

Development of a Smart Seat Cushion for Heart Rate Monitoring Using Ballistocardiography

2019· article· en· W2994045961 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Raza Malik, Laurel Pilon, Jennifer Boger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBallistocardiographyCushionWearable computerSittingComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Heart rateSimulationAccelerometerEngineeringEmbedded systemMedicineMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For many individuals with cardiac conditions, long term monitoring of heart vitals is an essential part of ongoing care. Current monitoring technologies, such as wearables and medical devices, though accurate, are obtrusive, require the person to remember to use them, and need to be used correctly. Wearable monitors are, therefore, not ideal for everyone. This research developed a prototype portable seat cushion that can capture heart rate using a cardiovascular signal called the ballistocardiogram (BCG) by a person simply sitting on the cushion. The cushion uses load cells embedded inside it as well as analog and digital signal conditioning to obtain BCG, which is then processed to calculate heart rate. Results from nine participants sitting still show that the cushion is able to obtain an average accuracy of 95.1%, which is as good as or better than other similar methods reported in the literature. To the authors' knowledge, this work represents the first portable ambient device for measuring heart rate from a seated position. The smart seat cushion can easily be integrated into an Ambient Assisted Living (AAL) system and offers a zero-effort and unobtrusive alternative to wearable monitoring devices.

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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