MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003401954 · doi:10.1109/mce.2019.2953736

A Wireless Body Area Network for Remote Observation of Physiological Signals

2020· article· en· W3003401954 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Body Area Networks
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityCentennial College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBody area networkDefault gatewayGSMResidential gatewayWearable computerWirelessWireless sensor networkEmbedded systemBase stationReal-time computingComputer networkTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this work is to describe the design process of a wireless body area network (WBAN) for the remote observation of multiple physiological signals from a patient. Various sensors such as temperature, heart rate monitor utilizing electrocardiography, and accelerometer to detect fall and seizure conditions were integrated in the WBAN. Sensed data is wirelessly transmitted to the central control unit (CCU) that is associated with a remote base station. For benchmarking, medically certified sensors were employed to validate wearable sensors data. The sensor information can be ported in the cloud environment using CCU-based gateway with Global System for Mobile communication (GSM) modem capability. This mechanism is facilitating remote access to sensors information. To connect Radio Frequency (RF) units wirelessly, Zigbee mesh topology was adopted. In this way, they can be remotely overseen, managed and controlled by assigned staff. The presented prototype featuring the desired WBAN system performance was evaluated with different human postures and moving scenarios.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.205 · 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