MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029485558 · doi:10.24018/ejece.2020.4.2.208

Extracting Heart Rate Variability: A Summary of Camera Based Photoplethysmograph

2020· article· en· W3029485558 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

VenueEuropean Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramHeart rateHeartbeatFaintingHeart rate variabilityComputer scienceHeart rate monitorArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMedicineInternal medicineComputer securityBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart rate is one of the major indicators of our physiological state. An irregular or rapid heartbeat, fainting, dizziness, chest pain or shortness of breath can be found by it. The traditional heart rate observing methods such as electrocardiogram (ECG) require physical contact in order to show the heart rate reading exactly but this is uncomfortable for regular monitoring. Techniques for measuring physiological parameters remotely from hospital, as well as monitoring patients continuously, have been one of the major concerns of the scholars. Many heart rate measurement methods using smartphone, webcam, commercial camera etc. have been proposed by many researchers. Image or video processing is the fundamental technique for measuring heart rate through smartphone. With the aim of exploring different heart rate monitoring methods and the advantages and disadvantages, the present study consulted secondary sources like published articles.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.179 · 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