Derivation of Breathing Metrics From a Photoplethysmogram at Rest: Machine Learning Methodology
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There has been a recent increased interest in monitoring health using wearable sensor technologies; however, few have focused on breathing. The ability to monitor breathing metrics may have indications both for general health as well as respiratory conditions such as asthma, where long-term monitoring of lung function has shown promising utility. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we explore a long short-term memory (LSTM) architecture and predict measures of interbreath intervals, respiratory rate, and the inspiration-expiration ratio from a photoplethysmogram signal. This serves as a proof-of-concept study of the applicability of a machine learning architecture to the derivation of respiratory metrics. METHODS: A pulse oximeter was mounted to the left index finger of 9 healthy subjects who breathed at controlled respiratory rates. A respiratory band was used to collect a reference signal as a comparison. RESULTS: Over a 40-second window, the LSTM model predicted a respiratory waveform through which breathing metrics could be derived with a bias value and 95% CI. Metrics included inspiration time (-0.16 seconds, -1.64 to 1.31 seconds), expiration time (0.09 seconds, -1.35 to 1.53 seconds), respiratory rate (0.12 breaths per minute, -2.13 to 2.37 breaths per minute), interbreath intervals (-0.07 seconds, -1.75 to 1.61 seconds), and the inspiration-expiration ratio (0.09, -0.66 to 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: A trained LSTM model shows acceptable accuracy for deriving breathing metrics and could be useful for long-term breathing monitoring in health. Its utility in respiratory disease (eg, asthma) warrants further investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it